How reliable are in vitro IC50 values? Values vary with cytotoxicity assays in human glioblastoma cells

Elisabetta Damiani, Jessica A. Solorio, Aiden P. Doyle, Heather M. Wallace (Corresponding Author)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Increasing evidence shows that discrepancies exist among in vitro cytotoxicity methods resulting in unreliable drug toxicity profiles. This is particularly criticial for cell lines such as gliomas which are histologically and genetically heterogeneous. The high level of variation in these cells makes comparative analysis difficult and is a severe limitation for the usefulness of high-throughput screening methods. Here we examine variations between four conventional in vitro cytotoxicity assays (MTT, Alamar Blue, Acid Phosphatase and Trypan Blue) for assessing the viable cell number following treatment of two human glioblastoma cell lines (U87MG and U373MG) with different chemical agents (carboplatin, etoposide, paraquat). The variations in IC50 values between the four assays suggest that even when combining several endpoints such as mitochondrial function, lysosomal activity, and membrane integrity, a reliable and uniform toxicity profile was not achieved. Because of these variations between cytotoxicity assays using compounds with varying mechanisms of cytotoxicity, then it is possible that the true IC50 value of valuable and beneficial compounds for glioblastoma may have been missed through over/underestimation. This highlights the importance of reliability and accuracy in pre-animal models such as in vitro models of cytotoxicity for better predictive in vivo responses.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)28-34
Number of pages7
JournalToxicology Letters
Volume302
Early online date15 Dec 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2019

Fingerprint

Glioblastoma
Cytotoxicity
Inhibitory Concentration 50
Assays
High-Throughput Screening Assays
Cell Line
Paraquat
Trypan Blue
Carboplatin
Etoposide
Toxicity
Acid Phosphatase
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
Glioma
Cells
Animal Models
Cell Count
Membranes
Screening
Animals

Keywords

  • cytotoxicity assays
  • Glioblastoma cells
  • Chemotherapy
  • Carboplatin
  • Etoposide
  • Paraquat

Cite this

How reliable are in vitro IC50 values? Values vary with cytotoxicity assays in human glioblastoma cells. / Damiani, Elisabetta; Solorio, Jessica A.; Doyle, Aiden P.; Wallace, Heather M. (Corresponding Author).

In: Toxicology Letters, Vol. 302, 01.03.2019, p. 28-34.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Damiani, Elisabetta ; Solorio, Jessica A. ; Doyle, Aiden P. ; Wallace, Heather M. / How reliable are in vitro IC50 values? Values vary with cytotoxicity assays in human glioblastoma cells. In: Toxicology Letters. 2019 ; Vol. 302. pp. 28-34.
@article{53dc10c4997d414fb0e0fd6ed1faabfc,
title = "How reliable are in vitro IC50 values? Values vary with cytotoxicity assays in human glioblastoma cells",
abstract = "Increasing evidence shows that discrepancies exist among in vitro cytotoxicity methods resulting in unreliable drug toxicity profiles. This is particularly criticial for cell lines such as gliomas which are histologically and genetically heterogeneous. The high level of variation in these cells makes comparative analysis difficult and is a severe limitation for the usefulness of high-throughput screening methods. Here we examine variations between four conventional in vitro cytotoxicity assays (MTT, Alamar Blue, Acid Phosphatase and Trypan Blue) for assessing the viable cell number following treatment of two human glioblastoma cell lines (U87MG and U373MG) with different chemical agents (carboplatin, etoposide, paraquat). The variations in IC50 values between the four assays suggest that even when combining several endpoints such as mitochondrial function, lysosomal activity, and membrane integrity, a reliable and uniform toxicity profile was not achieved. Because of these variations between cytotoxicity assays using compounds with varying mechanisms of cytotoxicity, then it is possible that the true IC50 value of valuable and beneficial compounds for glioblastoma may have been missed through over/underestimation. This highlights the importance of reliability and accuracy in pre-animal models such as in vitro models of cytotoxicity for better predictive in vivo responses.",
keywords = "cytotoxicity assays, Glioblastoma cells, Chemotherapy, Carboplatin, Etoposide, Paraquat",
author = "Elisabetta Damiani and Solorio, {Jessica A.} and Doyle, {Aiden P.} and Wallace, {Heather M.}",
note = "Funding E.D. was funded by an internal research grant from the Polytechnic University of the Marche provided by MIUR (Italian Ministry of University and Research).",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.toxlet.2018.12.004",
language = "English",
volume = "302",
pages = "28--34",
journal = "Toxicology Letters",
issn = "0378-4274",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How reliable are in vitro IC50 values? Values vary with cytotoxicity assays in human glioblastoma cells

AU - Damiani, Elisabetta

AU - Solorio, Jessica A.

AU - Doyle, Aiden P.

AU - Wallace, Heather M.

N1 - Funding E.D. was funded by an internal research grant from the Polytechnic University of the Marche provided by MIUR (Italian Ministry of University and Research).

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Increasing evidence shows that discrepancies exist among in vitro cytotoxicity methods resulting in unreliable drug toxicity profiles. This is particularly criticial for cell lines such as gliomas which are histologically and genetically heterogeneous. The high level of variation in these cells makes comparative analysis difficult and is a severe limitation for the usefulness of high-throughput screening methods. Here we examine variations between four conventional in vitro cytotoxicity assays (MTT, Alamar Blue, Acid Phosphatase and Trypan Blue) for assessing the viable cell number following treatment of two human glioblastoma cell lines (U87MG and U373MG) with different chemical agents (carboplatin, etoposide, paraquat). The variations in IC50 values between the four assays suggest that even when combining several endpoints such as mitochondrial function, lysosomal activity, and membrane integrity, a reliable and uniform toxicity profile was not achieved. Because of these variations between cytotoxicity assays using compounds with varying mechanisms of cytotoxicity, then it is possible that the true IC50 value of valuable and beneficial compounds for glioblastoma may have been missed through over/underestimation. This highlights the importance of reliability and accuracy in pre-animal models such as in vitro models of cytotoxicity for better predictive in vivo responses.

AB - Increasing evidence shows that discrepancies exist among in vitro cytotoxicity methods resulting in unreliable drug toxicity profiles. This is particularly criticial for cell lines such as gliomas which are histologically and genetically heterogeneous. The high level of variation in these cells makes comparative analysis difficult and is a severe limitation for the usefulness of high-throughput screening methods. Here we examine variations between four conventional in vitro cytotoxicity assays (MTT, Alamar Blue, Acid Phosphatase and Trypan Blue) for assessing the viable cell number following treatment of two human glioblastoma cell lines (U87MG and U373MG) with different chemical agents (carboplatin, etoposide, paraquat). The variations in IC50 values between the four assays suggest that even when combining several endpoints such as mitochondrial function, lysosomal activity, and membrane integrity, a reliable and uniform toxicity profile was not achieved. Because of these variations between cytotoxicity assays using compounds with varying mechanisms of cytotoxicity, then it is possible that the true IC50 value of valuable and beneficial compounds for glioblastoma may have been missed through over/underestimation. This highlights the importance of reliability and accuracy in pre-animal models such as in vitro models of cytotoxicity for better predictive in vivo responses.

KW - cytotoxicity assays

KW - Glioblastoma cells

KW - Chemotherapy

KW - Carboplatin

KW - Etoposide

KW - Paraquat

U2 - 10.1016/j.toxlet.2018.12.004

DO - 10.1016/j.toxlet.2018.12.004

M3 - Article

VL - 302

SP - 28

EP - 34

JO - Toxicology Letters

JF - Toxicology Letters

SN - 0378-4274

ER -