ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market by Product Type (Instruments, Kits, Reagents), Application (Autoimmune & Allergy, Cancer, Infectious Disease), End User, Platform Type - Global Forecast 2025-2032
Description
The ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market was valued at USD 313.61 million in 2024 and is projected to grow to USD 336.45 million in 2025, with a CAGR of 7.19%, reaching USD 546.77 million by 2032.
An authoritative introduction to ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays emphasizing their evolving role in translational immunology and clinical development
ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays occupy a central role in modern immunology and translational research by offering single-cell resolution of cytokine secretion and functional immune responses. These assays enable researchers to quantify antigen-specific T cell, B cell, and other immune effector responses with sensitivity and specificity that complement flow cytometry and bulk cytokine assays. Over the past decade, methodological refinements have improved assay reproducibility and throughput, establishing these techniques as core tools for vaccine evaluation, infectious disease monitoring, and immune-oncology studies.
Adoption has broadened from academic laboratories into contract research organizations and biopharma development programs, driven by the need for robust immunomonitoring during early-phase clinical trials and preclinical studies. Technological advances in reagent quality, plate formats, and imaging systems have reduced variability and expanded the kinds of endpoints that can be measured, while standardized protocols and quality-control practices have strengthened cross-study comparability. Looking forward, ELISpot and FluoroSpot will remain vital for dissecting cellular immune mechanisms, informing candidate selection in vaccine and cell therapy pipelines, and supporting biomarker development for regulatory submissions.
Transformative technological and operational shifts driving ELISpot and FluoroSpot from niche assays to integrated high-throughput immunoprofiling solutions
The landscape for ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays is being reshaped by a confluence of technological, operational, and scientific shifts that together are accelerating capability and widening applications. Automation and high-content imaging have enabled more consistent assay execution and data capture, reducing operator-dependent variability and permitting larger sample volumes to be analyzed in shorter timeframes. Concurrently, multiplexing chemistries and improvements in fluorophore stability are expanding the dimensionality of single-cell functional readouts, which supports more nuanced immune profiling in oncology and infectious disease studies.
Digital image analysis and machine learning are beginning to supplant manual spot counting, improving signal discrimination and enabling standardized quality metrics across laboratories. Supply chain innovations, including stabilized reagent formulations and off-the-shelf assay kits, are lowering technical barriers for non-specialist end users. At the same time, regulatory emphasis on assay validation and data traceability is prompting laboratories to adopt more rigorous QC workflows and audit-ready documentation. Collectively, these shifts are transitioning ELISpot and FluoroSpot from niche assay modalities toward integrated components of multi-assay immunoprofiling strategies.
Assessment of how United States tariff measures in 2025 have reshaped procurement, supplier strategies, and operational resilience across ELISpot and FluoroSpot workflows
The imposition of new tariffs and trade measures in the United States during 2025 has generated material implications across the ELISpot and FluoroSpot value chain, affecting instrument procurement, reagent sourcing, and service delivery models. Supply-side impacts have been most pronounced for complex reagents such as monoclonal antibodies and specialist substrates that are often manufactured or formulated in regions subject to higher import duties. Laboratories reliant on international suppliers have faced longer lead times, increased landed costs, and renewed scrutiny of inventory and inventory-holding practices.
In response, stakeholders have accelerated supplier diversification strategies, prioritized domestic or near-shore sourcing where feasible, and increased buffer stocks for critical reagents. Capital expenditures on instrumentation have been re-evaluated in the context of higher acquisition costs and potential tariff-related delays, prompting some organizations to extend equipment replacement cycles or to favor service-based procurement arrangements. Contract research providers and large end users have renegotiated terms to share tariff risk, while smaller labs have explored collective purchasing mechanisms to retain access to preferred reagents. Importantly, the tariffs have also reinforced the value of validated local distribution channels and contingency planning, prompting investment in redundant supply pathways and tighter supplier qualification processes to preserve experimental continuity and data integrity.
Granular segmentation insights connecting product types, applications, end users, assay methodologies, and platform configurations to strategic decision levers
Segmentation-based insights clarify where demand, capability, and risk converge across product, application, end user, assay type, and platform dimensions. Based on product type, the market comprises instruments, kits, reagents, and services; within kits there is an important distinction between ELISpot kits and FluoroSpot kits, and within reagents a focus on enzymes, monoclonal antibodies, and substrates underscores the criticality of reagent quality to assay performance. Each product segment follows distinct procurement and validation pathways, with instruments requiring capital planning and technical support while kits and reagents are consumed as recurring operational inputs.
Based on application, the assays are deployed across autoimmune and allergy research, cancer immunology, and infectious disease studies, with infectious disease work further split between bacterial and viral targets. These application nuances drive assay configuration choices and influence demand seasonality linked to outbreak responses or therapeutic development cycles. Based on end user, the landscape spans academic and research institutes, contract research organizations, and pharmaceutical and biotech companies; within the pharmaceutical and biotech group, both biotech firms and large pharmaceutical developers have different procurement rigor and throughput needs. Based on assay type, ELISpot and FluoroSpot define methodological pathways that determine sensitivity, multiplexing needs, and data analysis approaches. Based on platform type, manual and automated workflows coexist, and within automated systems a further separation exists between bench-top and high-throughput configurations, reflecting trade-offs between footprint, throughput, and capital intensity. Together, these segmentation frames provide a practical structure for prioritizing investments and tailoring service offerings to specific user requirements and operational constraints.
Regional dynamics and strategic implications for adoption, regulatory alignment, and supply chain configuration across the Americas, EMEA, and Asia-Pacific
Regional dynamics influence technology adoption rates, regulatory expectations, and supply chain approaches across the ELISpot and FluoroSpot ecosystem. In the Americas, strong translational research funding, a concentrated biopharma presence, and an established network of CROs support rapid uptake of advanced assay platforms, while procurement cycles can be influenced by centralized purchasing within large clinical programs. Europe, Middle East & Africa combine diverse regulatory environments and a mix of decentralized research networks; here, harmonized validation standards and cross-border distribution logistics are key factors shaping how laboratories select suppliers and implement automated solutions. In Asia-Pacific, high-capacity manufacturing, growing clinical trial activity, and significant public-health initiatives create strong demand for both cost-effective kit solutions and scalable automated platforms, with regional supply chains often offering competitive reagent availability.
These regional differences drive differentiated go-to-market strategies, with local technical support and regulatory familiarity serving as decisive selection criteria for many buyers. Strategic commercial approaches therefore require region-specific value propositions that align reagent stability profiles, instrument service models, and training offerings with the operational realities and regulatory expectations of each geography.
Competitive and collaborative company-level insights revealing how partnerships, automation, and reagent quality are shaping differentiated offerings and procurement decisions
Competitive dynamics within the ELISpot and FluoroSpot space are characterized by a blend of specialty reagent providers, instrument manufacturers, and service organizations offering end-to-end immunomonitoring. Leading players differentiate through reagent quality, validated assay kits, instrument reliability, and the depth of technical support and training. Strategic partnerships between reagent suppliers and instrument vendors have become more common, enabling bundled solutions that reduce implementation complexity and support quality assurance in multi-site studies.
Innovation is being driven by companies that invest in automated imaging, software analytics, and multiplex chemistries while also maintaining robust distribution networks. Service-focused entities, including CROs with immunology expertise, offer scaled assay execution and regulatory-compliant reporting that appeal to biotech firms conducting early-phase trials. Consolidation and collaboration trends are visible as organizations seek to combine complementary capabilities-such as advanced imaging and reagent development-to offer validated workflows that accelerate study timelines. For enterprise customers, vendor selection increasingly emphasizes reproducibility, supply resilience, and the ability to deliver audit-ready data in regulated settings.
Actionable strategic recommendations to build supply resilience, accelerate automation adoption, and align commercial models with regulatory and operational realities
Industry leaders should pursue a balanced strategy that protects experimental continuity while enabling technological advancement. First, diversify reagent and instrument supply chains to reduce exposure to trade disruptions and tariff-driven cost increases, and implement validated secondary sourcing for key monoclonal antibodies and substrates. Second, prioritize investment in automation and standardized imaging workflows where throughput and data consistency are strategic priorities, while retaining manual capabilities for specialized, low-throughput assays to preserve methodological flexibility.
Third, strengthen collaborations between internal assay development teams and external partners to accelerate kit validation and to co-develop multiplex solutions that align with clinical trial endpoints. Fourth, enhance quality systems and documentation practices to meet evolving regulatory expectations, including clear traceability for reagents and image-analysis audit trails. Fifth, adopt commercial strategies that align pricing models with customer risk profiles, offering service-based or subscription purchasing to smooth capital expenditure pressures. Finally, invest in workforce training and change management to ensure laboratory staff are proficient with automated systems and digital analysis tools, thereby maximizing the value of capital investments and reducing operational variation.
Transparent mixed-methods research methodology combining expert interviews, technical literature review, and cross-validation to ensure robust and actionable insights
The research underpinning this executive summary combined primary stakeholder engagement with a structured review of peer-reviewed literature, technical white papers, and publicly available regulatory guidance. Primary inputs included interviews with laboratory directors, assay development scientists, procurement leads at service providers, and instrumentation specialists to capture first-hand perspectives on assay performance drivers, sourcing challenges, and validation practices. These qualitative insights were triangulated with secondary sources that document technological advancements in imaging, fluorophore chemistry, and assay automation to ensure technical assertions are grounded in contemporary practice.
Analytical rigor was maintained through cross-validation of claims across multiple expert interviews and by mapping operational impacts to observable procurement and deployment behaviors. Where possible, methodological descriptions and validation approaches referenced established laboratory best practices to ensure recommendations are actionable for both research and regulated environments. The approach emphasized transparency in assumptions, iterative consultation with domain experts, and careful separation of descriptive observation from prescription to maintain objectivity in the findings.
Concluding synthesis highlighting how technological innovation and operational discipline together determine the strategic value and scalability of ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays
In summary, ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays are evolving from specialized immunological tools into scalable, validated components of translational and clinical development workflows. Technological innovations in automation, multiplexing, and digital analytics are increasing assay throughput and data richness, while supply chain and trade considerations are refocusing attention on sourcing resilience and supplier qualification. Segmentation and regional dynamics emphasize that product choice, platform commitments, and partnership structures must be tailored to the unique demands of specific applications, end users, and geographies.
Leaders who align investments in automation with rigorous quality systems, diversify sourcing to mitigate external shocks, and pursue collaborative development with reagent and instrument partners will be best positioned to extract strategic value from these assays. The balance of innovation and operational discipline will determine how quickly organizations can scale immunomonitoring capabilities to support vaccine development, immune-oncology programs, and infectious disease surveillance.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
An authoritative introduction to ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays emphasizing their evolving role in translational immunology and clinical development
ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays occupy a central role in modern immunology and translational research by offering single-cell resolution of cytokine secretion and functional immune responses. These assays enable researchers to quantify antigen-specific T cell, B cell, and other immune effector responses with sensitivity and specificity that complement flow cytometry and bulk cytokine assays. Over the past decade, methodological refinements have improved assay reproducibility and throughput, establishing these techniques as core tools for vaccine evaluation, infectious disease monitoring, and immune-oncology studies.
Adoption has broadened from academic laboratories into contract research organizations and biopharma development programs, driven by the need for robust immunomonitoring during early-phase clinical trials and preclinical studies. Technological advances in reagent quality, plate formats, and imaging systems have reduced variability and expanded the kinds of endpoints that can be measured, while standardized protocols and quality-control practices have strengthened cross-study comparability. Looking forward, ELISpot and FluoroSpot will remain vital for dissecting cellular immune mechanisms, informing candidate selection in vaccine and cell therapy pipelines, and supporting biomarker development for regulatory submissions.
Transformative technological and operational shifts driving ELISpot and FluoroSpot from niche assays to integrated high-throughput immunoprofiling solutions
The landscape for ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays is being reshaped by a confluence of technological, operational, and scientific shifts that together are accelerating capability and widening applications. Automation and high-content imaging have enabled more consistent assay execution and data capture, reducing operator-dependent variability and permitting larger sample volumes to be analyzed in shorter timeframes. Concurrently, multiplexing chemistries and improvements in fluorophore stability are expanding the dimensionality of single-cell functional readouts, which supports more nuanced immune profiling in oncology and infectious disease studies.
Digital image analysis and machine learning are beginning to supplant manual spot counting, improving signal discrimination and enabling standardized quality metrics across laboratories. Supply chain innovations, including stabilized reagent formulations and off-the-shelf assay kits, are lowering technical barriers for non-specialist end users. At the same time, regulatory emphasis on assay validation and data traceability is prompting laboratories to adopt more rigorous QC workflows and audit-ready documentation. Collectively, these shifts are transitioning ELISpot and FluoroSpot from niche assay modalities toward integrated components of multi-assay immunoprofiling strategies.
Assessment of how United States tariff measures in 2025 have reshaped procurement, supplier strategies, and operational resilience across ELISpot and FluoroSpot workflows
The imposition of new tariffs and trade measures in the United States during 2025 has generated material implications across the ELISpot and FluoroSpot value chain, affecting instrument procurement, reagent sourcing, and service delivery models. Supply-side impacts have been most pronounced for complex reagents such as monoclonal antibodies and specialist substrates that are often manufactured or formulated in regions subject to higher import duties. Laboratories reliant on international suppliers have faced longer lead times, increased landed costs, and renewed scrutiny of inventory and inventory-holding practices.
In response, stakeholders have accelerated supplier diversification strategies, prioritized domestic or near-shore sourcing where feasible, and increased buffer stocks for critical reagents. Capital expenditures on instrumentation have been re-evaluated in the context of higher acquisition costs and potential tariff-related delays, prompting some organizations to extend equipment replacement cycles or to favor service-based procurement arrangements. Contract research providers and large end users have renegotiated terms to share tariff risk, while smaller labs have explored collective purchasing mechanisms to retain access to preferred reagents. Importantly, the tariffs have also reinforced the value of validated local distribution channels and contingency planning, prompting investment in redundant supply pathways and tighter supplier qualification processes to preserve experimental continuity and data integrity.
Granular segmentation insights connecting product types, applications, end users, assay methodologies, and platform configurations to strategic decision levers
Segmentation-based insights clarify where demand, capability, and risk converge across product, application, end user, assay type, and platform dimensions. Based on product type, the market comprises instruments, kits, reagents, and services; within kits there is an important distinction between ELISpot kits and FluoroSpot kits, and within reagents a focus on enzymes, monoclonal antibodies, and substrates underscores the criticality of reagent quality to assay performance. Each product segment follows distinct procurement and validation pathways, with instruments requiring capital planning and technical support while kits and reagents are consumed as recurring operational inputs.
Based on application, the assays are deployed across autoimmune and allergy research, cancer immunology, and infectious disease studies, with infectious disease work further split between bacterial and viral targets. These application nuances drive assay configuration choices and influence demand seasonality linked to outbreak responses or therapeutic development cycles. Based on end user, the landscape spans academic and research institutes, contract research organizations, and pharmaceutical and biotech companies; within the pharmaceutical and biotech group, both biotech firms and large pharmaceutical developers have different procurement rigor and throughput needs. Based on assay type, ELISpot and FluoroSpot define methodological pathways that determine sensitivity, multiplexing needs, and data analysis approaches. Based on platform type, manual and automated workflows coexist, and within automated systems a further separation exists between bench-top and high-throughput configurations, reflecting trade-offs between footprint, throughput, and capital intensity. Together, these segmentation frames provide a practical structure for prioritizing investments and tailoring service offerings to specific user requirements and operational constraints.
Regional dynamics and strategic implications for adoption, regulatory alignment, and supply chain configuration across the Americas, EMEA, and Asia-Pacific
Regional dynamics influence technology adoption rates, regulatory expectations, and supply chain approaches across the ELISpot and FluoroSpot ecosystem. In the Americas, strong translational research funding, a concentrated biopharma presence, and an established network of CROs support rapid uptake of advanced assay platforms, while procurement cycles can be influenced by centralized purchasing within large clinical programs. Europe, Middle East & Africa combine diverse regulatory environments and a mix of decentralized research networks; here, harmonized validation standards and cross-border distribution logistics are key factors shaping how laboratories select suppliers and implement automated solutions. In Asia-Pacific, high-capacity manufacturing, growing clinical trial activity, and significant public-health initiatives create strong demand for both cost-effective kit solutions and scalable automated platforms, with regional supply chains often offering competitive reagent availability.
These regional differences drive differentiated go-to-market strategies, with local technical support and regulatory familiarity serving as decisive selection criteria for many buyers. Strategic commercial approaches therefore require region-specific value propositions that align reagent stability profiles, instrument service models, and training offerings with the operational realities and regulatory expectations of each geography.
Competitive and collaborative company-level insights revealing how partnerships, automation, and reagent quality are shaping differentiated offerings and procurement decisions
Competitive dynamics within the ELISpot and FluoroSpot space are characterized by a blend of specialty reagent providers, instrument manufacturers, and service organizations offering end-to-end immunomonitoring. Leading players differentiate through reagent quality, validated assay kits, instrument reliability, and the depth of technical support and training. Strategic partnerships between reagent suppliers and instrument vendors have become more common, enabling bundled solutions that reduce implementation complexity and support quality assurance in multi-site studies.
Innovation is being driven by companies that invest in automated imaging, software analytics, and multiplex chemistries while also maintaining robust distribution networks. Service-focused entities, including CROs with immunology expertise, offer scaled assay execution and regulatory-compliant reporting that appeal to biotech firms conducting early-phase trials. Consolidation and collaboration trends are visible as organizations seek to combine complementary capabilities-such as advanced imaging and reagent development-to offer validated workflows that accelerate study timelines. For enterprise customers, vendor selection increasingly emphasizes reproducibility, supply resilience, and the ability to deliver audit-ready data in regulated settings.
Actionable strategic recommendations to build supply resilience, accelerate automation adoption, and align commercial models with regulatory and operational realities
Industry leaders should pursue a balanced strategy that protects experimental continuity while enabling technological advancement. First, diversify reagent and instrument supply chains to reduce exposure to trade disruptions and tariff-driven cost increases, and implement validated secondary sourcing for key monoclonal antibodies and substrates. Second, prioritize investment in automation and standardized imaging workflows where throughput and data consistency are strategic priorities, while retaining manual capabilities for specialized, low-throughput assays to preserve methodological flexibility.
Third, strengthen collaborations between internal assay development teams and external partners to accelerate kit validation and to co-develop multiplex solutions that align with clinical trial endpoints. Fourth, enhance quality systems and documentation practices to meet evolving regulatory expectations, including clear traceability for reagents and image-analysis audit trails. Fifth, adopt commercial strategies that align pricing models with customer risk profiles, offering service-based or subscription purchasing to smooth capital expenditure pressures. Finally, invest in workforce training and change management to ensure laboratory staff are proficient with automated systems and digital analysis tools, thereby maximizing the value of capital investments and reducing operational variation.
Transparent mixed-methods research methodology combining expert interviews, technical literature review, and cross-validation to ensure robust and actionable insights
The research underpinning this executive summary combined primary stakeholder engagement with a structured review of peer-reviewed literature, technical white papers, and publicly available regulatory guidance. Primary inputs included interviews with laboratory directors, assay development scientists, procurement leads at service providers, and instrumentation specialists to capture first-hand perspectives on assay performance drivers, sourcing challenges, and validation practices. These qualitative insights were triangulated with secondary sources that document technological advancements in imaging, fluorophore chemistry, and assay automation to ensure technical assertions are grounded in contemporary practice.
Analytical rigor was maintained through cross-validation of claims across multiple expert interviews and by mapping operational impacts to observable procurement and deployment behaviors. Where possible, methodological descriptions and validation approaches referenced established laboratory best practices to ensure recommendations are actionable for both research and regulated environments. The approach emphasized transparency in assumptions, iterative consultation with domain experts, and careful separation of descriptive observation from prescription to maintain objectivity in the findings.
Concluding synthesis highlighting how technological innovation and operational discipline together determine the strategic value and scalability of ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays
In summary, ELISpot and FluoroSpot assays are evolving from specialized immunological tools into scalable, validated components of translational and clinical development workflows. Technological innovations in automation, multiplexing, and digital analytics are increasing assay throughput and data richness, while supply chain and trade considerations are refocusing attention on sourcing resilience and supplier qualification. Segmentation and regional dynamics emphasize that product choice, platform commitments, and partnership structures must be tailored to the unique demands of specific applications, end users, and geographies.
Leaders who align investments in automation with rigorous quality systems, diversify sourcing to mitigate external shocks, and pursue collaborative development with reagent and instrument partners will be best positioned to extract strategic value from these assays. The balance of innovation and operational discipline will determine how quickly organizations can scale immunomonitoring capabilities to support vaccine development, immune-oncology programs, and infectious disease surveillance.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
199 Pages
- 1. Preface
- 1.1. Objectives of the Study
- 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
- 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
- 1.4. Currency
- 1.5. Language
- 1.6. Stakeholders
- 2. Research Methodology
- 3. Executive Summary
- 4. Market Overview
- 5. Market Insights
- 5.1. Integration of high-throughput automation systems to accelerate ELISpot and FluoroSpot assay workflows
- 5.2. Adoption of multiplex FluoroSpot assays for simultaneous detection of multiple cytokines in immunoassays
- 5.3. Growing use of AI-driven image analysis software for more accurate ELISpot spot counting in immunology research
- 5.4. Development of label-free detection technologies to enhance sensitivity in ELISpot assays for rare cytokine detection
- 5.5. Rising demand for standardized assay protocols and reagent kits to ensure reproducibility in FluoroSpot testing across labs
- 5.6. Expansion of ELISpot applications in personalized cancer immunotherapy monitoring and vaccine efficacy studies
- 5.7. Emergence of microfluidic-based ELISpot platforms to reduce reagent consumption and increase assay throughput
- 5.8. Increasing regulatory focus on assay validation guidelines for clinical use of FluoroSpot in diagnostic settings
- 5.9. Integration of cloud-based data management solutions for collaborative analysis of ELISpot and FluoroSpot results
- 5.10. Development of synthetic peptide libraries to optimize antigen-specific responses in ELISpot immunoassays
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by Product Type
- 8.1. Instruments
- 8.2. Kits
- 8.2.1. Elispot Kits
- 8.2.2. Flurospot Kits
- 8.3. Reagents
- 8.3.1. Enzymes
- 8.3.2. Monoclonal Antibodies
- 8.3.3. Substrates
- 8.4. Services
- 9. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by Application
- 9.1. Autoimmune & Allergy
- 9.2. Cancer
- 9.3. Infectious Disease
- 9.3.1. Bacterial
- 9.3.2. Viral
- 10. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by End User
- 10.1. Academic & Research Institutes
- 10.2. CROs
- 10.3. Pharma & Biotech
- 10.3.1. Biotech Firms
- 10.3.2. Large Pharma
- 11. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by Platform Type
- 11.1. Automated
- 11.2. Manual
- 12. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by Region
- 12.1. Americas
- 12.1.1. North America
- 12.1.2. Latin America
- 12.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 12.2.1. Europe
- 12.2.2. Middle East
- 12.2.3. Africa
- 12.3. Asia-Pacific
- 13. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by Group
- 13.1. ASEAN
- 13.2. GCC
- 13.3. European Union
- 13.4. BRICS
- 13.5. G7
- 13.6. NATO
- 14. ELISpot & FluoroSpot Assay Market, by Country
- 14.1. United States
- 14.2. Canada
- 14.3. Mexico
- 14.4. Brazil
- 14.5. United Kingdom
- 14.6. Germany
- 14.7. France
- 14.8. Russia
- 14.9. Italy
- 14.10. Spain
- 14.11. China
- 14.12. India
- 14.13. Japan
- 14.14. Australia
- 14.15. South Korea
- 15. Competitive Landscape
- 15.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
- 15.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
- 15.3. Competitive Analysis
- 15.3.1. Abcam plc
- 15.3.2. Abnova Corporation
- 15.3.3. ALPCO
- 15.3.4. Anogen-Yes Biotech Laboratories Ltd.
- 15.3.5. Autoimmun Diagnostika GmbH (AID)
- 15.3.6. Becton, Dickinson and Company
- 15.3.7. Bio-Connect B.V.
- 15.3.8. Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
- 15.3.9. Bio-Techne Corporation
- 15.3.10. Biorbyt Ltd.
- 15.3.11. Cellular Technology Limited (CTL)
- 15.3.12. Enzo Life Sciences, Inc.
- 15.3.13. GenScript Biotech Corporation
- 15.3.14. Lophius Biosciences GmbH
- 15.3.15. Mabtech AB
- 15.3.16. Medix Biochemica
- 15.3.17. Merck KGaA
- 15.3.18. Oxford Immunotec Ltd.
- 15.3.19. STEMCELL Technologies Inc.
- 15.3.20. U-Cytech Biosciences
Pricing
Currency Rates
Questions or Comments?
Our team has the ability to search within reports to verify it suits your needs. We can also help maximize your budget by finding sections of reports you can purchase.
