Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20037651›Full record

ArticlePloS one2009

Intraclonal protein expression heterogeneity in recombinant CHO cells.

Warren Pilbrough, Trent P Munro, Peter Gray

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed, 204 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Screening Strategies for High-Yield Chinese Hamster Ovary Cell Clones.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Review

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Warren PilbroughAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Trent P Munro
Peter Gray
University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Therapeutic glycoproteins have played a major role in the commercial success of biotechnology in the post-genomic era. But isolating recombinant mammalian cell lines for large-scale production remains costly and time-consuming, due to substantial variation and unpredictable stability of expression amongst transfected cells, requiring extensive clone screening to identify suitable high producers. Streamlining this process is of considerable interest to industry yet the underlying phenomena are still not well understood. Here we examine an antibody-expressing Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) clone at single-cell resolution using flow cytometry and vectors, which couple light and heavy chain transcription to fluorescent markers. Expression variation has traditionally been attributed to genetic heterogeneity arising from random genomic integration of vector DNA. It follows that single cell cloning should yield a homogeneous cell population. We show, in fact, that expression in a clone can be surprisingly heterogeneous (standard deviation 50 to 70% of the mean), approaching the level of variation in mixed transfectant pools, and each antibody chain varies in tandem. Phenotypic variation is fully developed within just 18 days of cloning, yet is not entirely explained by measurement noise, cell size, or the cell cycle. By monitoring the dynamic response of subpopulations and subclones, we show that cells also undergo slow stochastic fluctuations in expression (half-life 2 to 11 generations). Non-genetic diversity may therefore play a greater role in clonal variation than previously thought. This also has unexpected implications for expression stability. Stochastic gene expression noise and selection bias lead to perturbations from steady state at the time of cloning. The resulting transient response as clones reestablish their expression distribution is not ordinarily accounted for but can contribute to declines in median expression over timescales of up to 50 days. Noise minimization may therefore be a novel strategy to reduce apparent expression instability and simplify cell line selection.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell CycleCell ShapeCell SizeCHO CellsClone CellsCricetinaeCricetulusFlow CytometryFluorescenceHumansImmunoglobulin GRecombination, GeneticImmunoglobulin G

Identifiers

PMID20037651
PMCPMC2793030
OpenAlexW2066499437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.