| Literature DB >> 30180158 |
Maria Serena Piccinno1,2, Tiziana Petrachi1,2, Elisa Resca1,2, Valentina Strusi1, Valentina Bergamini2, Giuseppe Antonio Mulas1, Giorgio Mari1, Massimo Dominici1,2, Elena Veronesi1,2.
Abstract
The high-throughput, label-free Corning Epic assay has applications in drug discovery, pharmacogenomics, cell receptor signaling, cell migration, and viral titration. The utility of Epic technology for biocompatibility testing has not been well established. In manufacturing of medical devices, in vitro and in vivo biocompatibility assessments are mandatory, according to ISO 10993. The new medical device regulation MDR 745/2017 specifies that ex vivo assays that can closely recapitulate in vivo scenarios are needed to better evaluate biomedical devices. We propose herein that Epic technology-which enables detection of variations in cell mass distribution-is suitable for biocompatibility screening of compounds. In this study, we challenged primary <span class="Species">human osteoblasts, endothelial cells, and neurons derived from induced pluripotent stem cells with specific concentrations of <span class="Chemical">methyl methacrylate (MMA). Polymeric MMA has long been applied in cranioplasty, where it makes contact with multiple cell types. Application of Epic technology yielded real-time cytotoxicity profiles for all considered cell types. The results were compared with those from microscopic observation of the same culture plate used in the Epic analyses. The Epic assay should be further examined for its utility for cell biology, genomics, and proteomics companion assays. Our results suggest that Epic technology can be applied to biocompatibility evaluation of human cells in medical device development.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30180158 PMCID: PMC6122932 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201671
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Cell phenotypic profile results of the Epic label-free assay, and implications for toxicology testing.
Fig 1A: After administration of the compound, a positive-dynamic mass redistribution (P-DMR) indicated an increase in the cell response and correlated with augmented cell size. Conversely, a decrease in the cell response was observed as a negative-dynamic mass redistribution (N-DMR) and correlated with cell shrinkage. Fig 1B: The difference in response (Δ) between the negative (green circle) and positive controls (red circle) enabled discrimination of nontoxic compounds (i.e., similar to the negative control) from toxic compounds (i.e., similar to the positive control).
Fig 2Effects of MMA on osteoblasts and HUVECs.
A label-free assay (Epic, Corning) of cell response was carried out using 0.2% DMSO as the negative control and 0.1% SDS as the positive control. Osteoblasts and HUVECs were exposed to 3 concentrations of MMA: 250 μg/cm2, 550 μg/cm2, and 700 μg/cm2. Fig 2A–2D: Results of the Epic assay on osteoblasts. Fig 2A: The phenotypic profile of osteoblasts exposed to 0.1% SDS resembles a model of exponential decay and was specified as a hyperbolic 1-phase decay curve in GraphPad software. The red inset displays features of the osteoblasts 24 hours after SDS administration. Note the complete detachment of cells from the plastic. Fig 2B: Multiple time point measurement findings were plotted in a 2D dispersion graph, with relative z’-factor analysis (n = 6). MMA-treated cells exhibited a range of responses comparable to those of DMSO-treated cells. Hence, the monomer was nontoxic to these cells. Fig 2C: Representative photomicrographs of osteoblasts treated with 0.2% DMSO or with MMA at 1 of the 3 specified concentrations. After 24 hours, both DMSO-treated and MMA-treated samples displayed normal cell morphologies, indicating a lack of toxicity. Fig 2D: Phenotypic profile analysis of osteoblasts treated with DMSO or MMA. Within 20 minutes, MMA-treated osteoblasts displayed a response comparable to those treated with DMSO. At 60 minutes, the responses to MMA differed in a dose-dependent manner (1-way ANOVA; p < 0.05). Fig 2E–2H: Results of the Epic assay in HUVECs (endothelial cells). Fig 2E: The phenotypic profile of HUVECs exposed to 0.1% SDS resembled a model of exponential decay and was specified as a hyperbolic 1-phase decay curve by GraphPad software. The red inset depicts features of the HUVECs 24 hours after SDS administration. Note the complete lack of plastic-adhering cells. Fig 2F: Multiple time point measurement results were plotted in a 2D dispersion graph, with relative z’-factor analysis (n = 6). MMA-treated cells showed a range of responses comparable to those of DMSO-treated cells. Therefore, the MMA monomer is nontoxic in these cells. Fig 2G: Representative photomicrographs of HUVECs treated with 0.2% DMSO or MMA at 1 of the 3 specified concentrations. After 24 hours, both DMSO-treated and MMA-treated samples displayed normal cell morphologies, indicating a lack of toxicity. Fig 2H: Phenotypic profile analysis of HUVECs treated with DMSO or MMA. For all MMA concentrations tested, HUVEC responses were comparable and differed statistically from those of DMSO-treated cells at 20- and 60-minute time points (1-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Effects of compound type and incubation time on cellular responses.
| 3,3 | 4,2 x 10−5 | |
| 14,1 | 1,1 x 10−12 | |
| 3,3 | 2 x 10−2 | |
| 2,1 | 9 x 10−3 | |
| 8,9 | 2,7 x 10−8 | |
| 13,1 | 1,4 x 10−7 | |
| 1,8 | 3 x 10−2 | |
| 15,1 | 2,6 x 10−13 | |
| 70,5 | 7,5 x 10-28 | |
A-C: Two-way ANOVA was applied to data analyses for all cell types. Compounds and incubation times, as well as the interactions of these factors, influence the responses of osteoblasts, HUVECs, and iPS-derived neurons.
Fig 3Effects of MMA on iPS-derived neurons, ascertained by the Epic label-free assay.
The Epic label-free assay was carried out on iPS-derived neurons, with 0.2% DMSO and 0.1% SDS as negative and positive controls, respectively. Neurons were exposed to 1 of 3 concentrations of MMA: 250 μg/cm2, 550 μg/cm2, or 700 μg/cm2 of the cell layer surface. Fig 3A: The phenotypic profile of iPS-derived neurons exposed to 0.1% SDS resembled a model of exponential decay. Within 1 minute after SDS addition, iPS-derived neurons responded with an early P-DMR. The red inset indicates features of the iPS-derived neurons 24 hours after SDS administration. Note the increase in cell volume (indicated by arrowheads) and the appearance of ruffling cell membranes (indicated by arrows). Fig 3B: Multiple time point measurement findings were plotted in a 2D dispersion graph, with relative z’-factor analysis (n = 6). The early P-DMR for SDS-treated neurons was associated with a robust z’ factor (z ≥ 0.5) at 1 minute and after 24 hours. MMA-exposed cells exhibited a range of responses that was comparable to those administered DMSO. Hence, MMA was nontoxic to these cells at the tested concentrations. Fig 3C: Representative photomicrographs of cells treated with 0.2% DMSO or MMA. After 24 hours, DMSO-treated and MMA-treated samples exhibited normal morphologic characteristics, which indicated a lack of toxicity. Fig 3D: Phenotypic profile analysis of iPS-derived neurons treated with DMSO or MMA. At 60 minutes, iPS-derived neurons treated with prespecified concentrations of MMA exhibited responses that were comparable to each other and that differed significantly from those of DMSO-treated cells (1-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).