» Articles » PMID: 19572560

Chip-based Dynamic Real-time Quantification of Drug-induced Cytotoxicity in Human Tumor Cells

Overview
Journal Anal Chem
Specialty Chemistry
Date 2009 Jul 4
PMID 19572560
Citations 21
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Cell cytotoxicity tests are among the most common bioassays using flow cytometry and fluorescence imaging analysis. The permeability of plasma membranes to charged fluorescent probes serves, in these assays, as a marker distinguishing live from dead cells. Since it is generally assumed that probes, such as propidium iodide (PI) or 7-amino-actinomycin D (7-AAD), are themselves cytotoxic, they are currently generally used only as the end-point markers of assays for live versus dead cells. In the current study, we provide novel insights into potential applications of these classical plasma membrane integrity markers in the dynamic tracking of drug-induced cytotoxicity. We show that treatment of a number of different human tumor cell lines in cultures for up to 72 h with the PI, 7-AAD, SYTOX Green (SY-G), SYTOX Red (SY-R), TO-PRO, and YO-PRO had no effect on cell viability assessed by the integrity of plasma membrane, cell cycle progression, and rate of proliferation. We subsequently explore the potential of dynamic labeling with these markers in real-time analysis, by comparing results from both conventional cytometry and microfluidic chips. Considering the simplicity of the staining protocols and their low cost combined with the potential for real-time data collection, we show how that real-time fluorescent imaging and Lab-on-a-Chip platforms have the potential to be used for automated drug screening routines.

Citing Articles

Cost-effective fabrication of photopolymer molds with multi-level microstructures for PDMS microfluidic device manufacture.

Olmos C, Penaherrera A, Rosero G, Vizuete K, Ruarte D, Follo M RSC Adv. 2022; 10(7):4071-4079.

PMID: 35492655 PMC: 9048755. DOI: 10.1039/c9ra07955f.


An Image-based Assay for High-throughput Analysis of Cell Proliferation and Cell Death of Adherent Cells.

Szalai P, Engedal N Bio Protoc. 2021; 8(9):e2835.

PMID: 34286042 PMC: 8275286. DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.2835.


A multivariate, quantitative assay that disentangles key kinetic parameters of primary human T cell function in vitro.

Huang G, Nampe D, Yi J, Gabrelow G, Negri K, Kamb A PLoS One. 2020; 15(11):e0241421.

PMID: 33166305 PMC: 7652339. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241421.


Microfluidic flow cytometry: The role of microfabrication methodologies, performance and functional specification.

Shrirao A, Fritz Z, Novik E, Yarmush G, Schloss R, Zahn J Technology (Singap World Sci). 2018; 6(1):1-23.

PMID: 29682599 PMC: 5907470. DOI: 10.1142/S2339547818300019.


Time-resolved, single-cell analysis of induced and programmed cell death via non-invasive propidium iodide and counterstain perfusion.

Kramer C, Wiechert W, Kohlheyer D Sci Rep. 2016; 6:32104.

PMID: 27580964 PMC: 5007472. DOI: 10.1038/srep32104.


References
1.
Fukunaga M, Yielding K . Co-mutagenic effects of propidium on petite induction by ethidium in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mutat Res. 1980; 69(1):43-50. DOI: 10.1016/0027-5107(80)90174-8. View

2.
Carew J, Nawrocki S, Krupnik Y, Dunner Jr K, McConkey D, Keating M . Targeting endoplasmic reticulum protein transport: a novel strategy to kill malignant B cells and overcome fludarabine resistance in CLL. Blood. 2005; 107(1):222-31. PMC: 1895341. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2005-05-1923. View

3.
Yin H, Pattrick N, Zhang X, Klauke N, Cordingley H, Haswell S . Quantitative comparison between microfluidic and microtiter plate formats for cell-based assays. Anal Chem. 2007; 80(1):179-85. DOI: 10.1021/ac701958z. View

4.
Yin H, Zhang X, Pattrick N, Klauke N, Cordingley H, Haswell S . Influence of hydrodynamic conditions on quantitative cellular assays in microfluidic systems. Anal Chem. 2007; 79(18):7139-44. DOI: 10.1021/ac071146k. View

5.
Sia S, Whitesides G . Microfluidic devices fabricated in poly(dimethylsiloxane) for biological studies. Electrophoresis. 2003; 24(21):3563-76. DOI: 10.1002/elps.200305584. View