Figures - Automatic quantification method of eosinophilic degranulation in tissues: application for the study of eosinophilic disorders

Figure 2: (A) Anti-EPX staining of histological samples was manually and automatically quantified in 2 fields (F1 and F2) in 3 sections of BP biopsies (BP 1 to 3). (B) Comparison of degranulation surfaces between manual quantification by 2 independent experts and automatic quantification by the EoJ method of study areas (n=6) (B). Expert 1 (green) vs. Expert 2 (red) vs. EoJ (blue), p>0.05, paired Friedman test and Dunn’s multiple comparison test. NS: nonsignificant. (C) Correlation matrix as appropriate, p<0.05 for all correlations.

Figure 3: (A) Representative skin biopsies of BP, psoriasis and healthy skin (anti-EPX staining, high-power field x200). (B) Comparison of Eo density (cell/mm², left), isolated granule density (granules/mm², middle) and degranulation ratio (right) between the 3 groups (BP n=7, psoriasis n=7 and healthy skin n=7; *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ns: nonsignificant) according to unpaired nonparametric Kruskal‒Wallis test and Dunn’s multiple comparison test. For the comparison, the degranulation surfaces are expressed as a ratio of quantified degranulation surfaces to total biopsy surface. BP: bullous pemphigoid, Pso: psoriasis and HS: healthy skin.

Figure 5: Representative biopsies of EoE, BP and NP with low-density infiltrate (A, green) with intact cells and high-density infiltrate of Eo aggregates (B, red). Graphical representation of high heterogenous infiltration by Eos in tissues concerning intact cell density, isolated granule density (per mm²) and ratio of degranulation surfaces to total EPX surfaces (C). The highest intact Eo density in the series is graphically represented by red dots, and the lowest infiltration is represented by green dots: the highest intact Eo infiltrate is not necessarily associated with the highest degranulation ratio.