ArticleJournal of cellular and molecular medicine2010
Discrepancies between metabolic activity and DNA content as tool to assess cell proliferation in cancer research.
Article in Journal of cellular and molecular medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
76 citing papers in PubMed, 206 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supraphysiological 25-Hydroxyvitamin DFASEB bioAdvances · 2026Article
- Role of Collection Media on the Biological Activity of Extracellular Vesicles From hTERT-Immortalised Mesenchymal Stromal Cells.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2026Article
- Biodegradable Synthetic Graft with Sustained Hydrogen Sulfide Release Promotes Endothelial Cell Growth.Macromolecular bioscience · 2025Article
- Photocurable and 3D Printable Functional Polyesters to Engineer Elastomeric Scaffolds for Biomedical Applications.Macromolecular bioscience · 2025Article
- Integrated approach to cell growth and recovery in silk fibroin scaffolds via a spin-down system.Biomaterials and biosystems · 2025Article
- Article
- Optimization of a rapid, sensitive, and high throughput molecular sensor to measure canola protoplast respiratory metabolism as a means of screening nanomaterial cytotoxicity.Plant methods · 2024Article
- Diseased Tendon Models Demonstrate Influence of Extracellular Matrix Alterations on Extracellular Vesicle Profile.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Ir(III) Half-Sandwich Photosensitizers with a π-Expansive Ligand for Efficient Anticancer Photodynamic Therapy.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2024Article
- Article
- A versatile pumpless multi-channel fluidics system for maintenance and real-time functional assessment of tissue and cells.Cell reports methods · 2023Article
- Methionine Sources Differently Affect Production of Reactive Oxygen Species, Mitochondrial Bioenergetics, and Growth of Murine and Quail Myoblasts In Vitro.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Article
- In vitro cytocompatibility and antibacterial studies on biodegradable Zn alloys supplemented by a critical assessment of direct contact cytotoxicity assay.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials · 2023Article
- Phytochemical Analysis and Antiproliferative Activity ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Surface Engineering of Auxetic Scaffolds for Neural and Vascular Differentiation from Human Pluripotent Stem Cells.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Shockwaves Increase In Vitro Resilience ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Chemotherapy drug potency assessment method of ovarian cancer cells by digital holography microscopy.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
- Cohesion mechanisms for bioadhesives.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Quorum quenching of Streptococcus mutans via the nano-quercetin-based antimicrobial photodynamic therapy as a potential target for cariogenic biofilm.BMC microbiology · 2022Article
- Resistance to mutant KRASExperimental cell research · 2022Article
16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cell proliferation is a critical and frequently studied feature of molecular biology in cancer research. Therefore, various assays are available using different strategies to measure cell proliferation. Metabolic assays such as AlamarBlue, water-soluble tetrazolium salt and 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide, which were originally developed to determine cell toxicity, are used to assess cell numbers. Additionally, proliferative activity can be determined by quantification of DNA content using fluorophores such as CyQuant and PicoGreen. Referring to data published in high ranking cancer journals, these assays were applied in 945 publications over the past 14 years to examine the proliferative behaviour of diverse cell types. In these studies, however, mainly metabolic assays were used to quantify changes in cell growth yet these assays may not accurately reflect cellular proliferation rates due to a miscorrelation of metabolic activity and cell number. Testing this hypothesis, we compared the metabolic activity of different cell types, human cancer cells and primary cells, over a time period of 4 days using AlamarBlue and the fluorometric assays CyQuant and PicoGreen to determine their DNA content. Our results show certain discrepancies in terms of over-estimation of cell proliferation with respect to the metabolic assay in comparison to DNA binding fluorophores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.