Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23691072›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

A simple high-content cell cycle assay reveals frequent discrepancies between cell number and ATP and MTS proliferation assays.

Grace Ka Yan Chan, Tracy L Kleinheinz, David Peterson, John G Moffat

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 164 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Peptide-coated DNA nanostructures as a platform for control of lysosomal function in cells.Chemical engineering journal (Lausanne, Switzerland : 1996) · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Effects of Fasting on THP1 Macrophage Metabolism and Inflammatory Profile.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Grace Ka Yan ChanDepartment of Biochemical and Cellular Pharmacology, Genentech, Inc South, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Tracy L Kleinheinz
David Peterson
John G Moffat
Biochemical Society · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to efficiently characterize both antiproliferative potency and mechanism of action of small molecules targeting the cell cycle, we developed a high-throughput image-based assay to determine cell number and cell cycle phase distribution. Using this we profiled the effects of experimental and approved anti-cancer agents with a range mechanisms of action on a set of cell lines, comparing direct cell counting versus two metabolism-based cell viability/proliferation assay formats, ATP-dependent bioluminescence, MTS (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-5-(3-carboxymethoxyphenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium) reduction, and a whole-well DNA-binding dye fluorescence assay. We show that, depending on compound mechanisms of action, the metabolism-based proxy assays are frequently prone to 1) significant underestimation of compound potency and efficacy, and 2) non-monotonic dose-response curves due to concentration-dependent phenotypic 'switching'. In particular, potency and efficacy of DNA synthesis-targeting agents such as gemcitabine and etoposide could be profoundly underestimated by ATP and MTS-reduction assays. In the same image-based assay we showed that drug-induced increases in ATP content were associated with increased cell size and proportionate increases in mitochondrial content and respiratory flux concomitant with cell cycle arrest. Therefore, differences in compound mechanism of action and cell line-specific responses can yield significantly misleading results when using ATP or tetrazolium-reduction assays as a proxy for cell number when screening compounds for antiproliferative activity or profiling panels of cell lines for drug sensitivity.

Indexed as

Adenosine TriphosphateAntineoplastic AgentsCell CountCell CycleCell Line, TumorCell ProliferationDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug DiscoveryHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysHumansLuminescent MeasurementsTetrazolium SaltsAdenosine TriphosphateAntineoplastic AgentsTetrazolium Salts

Identifiers

PMID23691072
PMCPMC3656927
OpenAlexW1990472984

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.