The need for a worldwide consensus for cell line authentication: Experience implementing a mandatory requirement at the International Journal of Cancer - PubMed (original) (raw)

The need for a worldwide consensus for cell line authentication: Experience implementing a mandatory requirement at the International Journal of Cancer

Norbert E Fusenig et al. PLoS Biol. 2017.

Abstract

Cell lines are used in life science research worldwide as biological surrogates. All cell lines are subject to major limitations when used as research tools, including (i) cross-contamination with other cells cultured in the same laboratory environment and (ii) evolution in vitro that renders a given cell line inappropriate as a surrogate for a specific biological hypothesis. There is ample evidence that cross-contamination or phenotypic drift of cells in culture can generate irreproducible or misleading data. A small number of scientific journals-the International Journal of Cancer being at the forefront-and funding agencies have recently moved forward to ask for obligatory cell line authentication data. The history of implementing such rules by the International Journal of Cancer exemplifies the difficulties encountered when installing mandatory quality measures in life sciences.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1

Fig 1. Usage of five misidentified cell lines in the scientific literature as shown by PubMed searches for cell line name and incorrect tissue identity.

Fig 2

Fig 2. Workflow at the IJC, including checking of cell line documents.

Fig 3

Fig 3. Percentages of papers unsubmitted for cell line issues, by continent and by year.

Generated from S1 Data and S2 Data.

Fig 4

Fig 4. Papers unsubmitted for cell line issues and then resubmitted, by continent in 2011–2013.

Generated from S1 Data.

Fig 5

Fig 5. Acceptance rate for all submissions and for papers previously unsubmitted for cell line issues, by continent in 2011–2013.

Generated from S1 Data, S2 Data, and S3 Data.

Fig 6

Fig 6. Acceptance rate for all submissions and for papers previously unsubmitted for cell line issues for Asia, by year.

Generated from S1 Data, S2 Data, and S3 Data.

Fig 7

Fig 7. Journal articles using the misidentified cell line HBL-100.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Pleasance ED, Stephens PJ, O'Meara S, McBride DJ, Meynert A, Jones D, et al. A small-cell lung cancer genome with complex signatures of tobacco exposure. Nature. 2010; 463(7278):184–190. doi: 10.1038/nature08629 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pham K, Delitto D, Knowlton AE, Hartlage ER, Madhavan R, Gonzalo DH, et al. Isolation of pancreatic cancer cells from a patient-derived xenograft model allows for practical expansion and preserved heterogeneity in culture. Am J Pathol. 2016; 186(6):1537–1546. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2016.02.009 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nims RW, Herbstritt CJ. Cell line authentication using isoenzyme analysis. Bio Pharm Int. 2005; 18: 76–82.
    1. Wrigley JD, McCall EJ, Bannaghan CL, Liggins L, Kendrick C, Griffen A, et al. Cell banking for pharmaceutical research. Drug Discov Today. 2014; 19(10):1518–1529. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2014.05.006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Characterized Cell Line Core Facility. MD Anderson Cancer Center. https://www.mdanderson.org/education-and-research/resources-for-professi....

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

LinkOut - more resources