Literature DB >> 20185335

Validation of cell density and viability assays using Cedex automated cell counter.

Li-Chun Huang1, Wendy Lin, Machiko Yagami, Daphne Tseng, Emily Miyashita-Lin, Nitasha Singh, Andy Lin, Shian-Jiun Shih.   

Abstract

A method using Cedex automatic cell counter (Innovatis) to determine the cell density and viability of a whole cell-based immunotherapy product has been developed and validated for the assay performance characteristics including specificity, accuracy, precision, linearity, range, and robustness. Instrument-to-instrument variation due to intrinsic differences in handmade flow cells was also evaluated. For cell density, Cedex demonstrated acceptable specificity, accuracy and precision for cell densities ranging from 3.13x10(5) to approximately 1.0x10(7)cells/mL, with intermediate precision of about 5% relative standard deviation (RSD). However, a marked difference was observed between the two instruments studied and they therefore could not be used interchangeably without additional calibration procedures that went beyond the manufacturer's recommendation. For viability, mixing known numbers of non-viable cells with highly viable cells allowed evaluation of the specificity, accuracy and linearity of the viability determination. Acceptable levels of accuracy (95.3-106.4% recovery) and precision (RSD<5%) were demonstrated for the viability range from 50 to 100%. The instrument-to-instrument difference was less than 4.6%. The assays for both cell density and viability were sufficiently robust for assay parameters. However, the effect of certain parameters was cell line-dependent, suggesting that Cedex performance should be verified for each cell line of interest. 2010 The International Association for Biologicals. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20185335     DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2010.01.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biologicals        ISSN: 1045-1056            Impact factor:   1.856


  7 in total

1.  Impact of Different Cell Counting Methods in Molecular Monitoring of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients.

Authors:  Stefania Stella; Silvia Rita Vitale; Fabio Stagno; Michele Massimino; Adriana Puma; Cristina Tomarchio; Maria Stella Pennisi; Elena Tirrò; Chiara Romano; Francesco Di Raimondo; Emma Cacciola; Rossella Cacciola; Livia Manzella
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-22

2.  Validation of three viable-cell counting methods: Manual, semi-automated, and automated.

Authors:  Daniela Cadena-Herrera; Joshua E Esparza-De Lara; Nancy D Ramírez-Ibañez; Carlos A López-Morales; Néstor O Pérez; Luis F Flores-Ortiz; Emilio Medina-Rivero
Journal:  Biotechnol Rep (Amst)       Date:  2015-04-18

3.  Comparison of six different methods to calculate cell densities.

Authors:  Carolina Camacho-Fernández; David Hervás; Alba Rivas-Sendra; Mª Pilar Marín; Jose M Seguí-Simarro
Journal:  Plant Methods       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 4.993

4.  Non-invasive cell counting of adherent, suspended and encapsulated mammalian cells using optical density.

Authors:  Ayesha Aijaz; Dylan Trawinski; Scott McKirgan; Biju Parekkadan
Journal:  Biotechniques       Date:  2019-12-24       Impact factor: 1.993

5.  An automated HIV-1 Env-pseudotyped virus production for global HIV vaccine trials.

Authors:  Anke Schultz; Stefanie Koch; Martina Fuss; Angela S Mazzotta; Marcella Sarzotti-Kelsoe; Daniel A Ozaki; David C Montefiori; Hagen von Briesen; Heiko Zimmermann; Andreas Meyerhans
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Digital cell counting device integrated with a single-cell array.

Authors:  Tatsuya Saeki; Masahito Hosokawa; Tae-kyu Lim; Manabu Harada; Tadashi Matsunaga; Tsuyoshi Tanaka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Multi-volume hemacytometer.

Authors:  Ravangnam Thunyaporn; Il Doh; Dong Woo Lee
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.