Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32442784›Full record

ReviewActa biomaterialia2020

Past, Present, and Future of Affinity-based Cell Separation Technologies.

Kaitlyn Bacon, Ashton Lavoie, Balaji M Rao, Michael Daniele, Stefano Menegatti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta biomaterialia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Step-by-Step Preparation of Immobilized RecombinantAvicenna journal of medical biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Separation of intrinsically magnetic cells using magnetic filters.Separation and purification technology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Biomaterials for Cell Manufacturing.ACS macro letters · 2024
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Kaitlyn BaconDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905, USA.
Ashton LavoieDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905, USA.
Balaji M RaoDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905, USA; Biomanufacturing Training and Education Center (BTEC), North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7928, USA.
Michael DanieleJoint Department of Biomedical Engineering, North Carolina State University - University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States.
Stefano MenegattiDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905, USA; Biomanufacturing Training and Education Center (BTEC), North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7928, USA. Electronic address: smenega@ncsu.edu.

Funding

Molecular Biotechnology Training at North Carolina State UniversityT32GM008776 · NIGMS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI KELLY, ROBERT M · 2000 to 2019
$3.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008776
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Progress in cell purification technology is critical to increase the availability of viable cells for therapeutic, diagnostic, and research applications. A variety of techniques are now available for cell separation, ranging from non-affinity methods such as density gradient centrifugation, dielectrophoresis, and filtration, to affinity methods such as chromatography, two-phase partitioning, and magnetic-/fluorescence-assisted cell sorting. For clinical and analytical procedures that require highly purified cells, the choice of cell purification method is crucial, since every method offers a different balance between yield, purity, and bioactivity of the cell product. For most applications, the requisite purity is only achievable through affinity methods, owing to the high target specificity that they grant. In this review, we discuss past and current methods for developing cell-targeting affinity ligands and their application in cell purification, along with the benefits and challenges associated with different purification formats. We further present new technologies, like stimuli-responsive ligands and parallelized microfluidic devices, towards improving the viability and throughput of cell products for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Our comparative analysis provides guidance in the multifarious landscape of cell separation techniques and highlights new technologies that are poised to play a key role in the future of cell purification in clinical settings and the biotech industry. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Technologies for cell purification have served science, medicine, and industrial biotechnology and biomanufacturing for decades. This review presents a comprehensive survey of this field by highlighting the scope and relevance of all known methods for cell isolation, old and new alike. The first section covers the main classes of target cells and compares traditional non-affinity and affinity-based purification techniques, focusing on established ligands and chromatographic formats. The second section presents an excursus of affinity-based pseudo-chromatographic and non-chromatographic technologies, especially focusing on magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) and fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS). Finally, the third section presents an overview of new technologies and emerging trends, highlighting how the progress in chemical, material, and microfluidic sciences has opened new exciting avenues towards high-throughput and high-purity cell isolation processes. This review is designed to guide scientists and engineers in their choice of suitable cell purification techniques for research or bioprocessing needs.

Indexed as

Regenerative MedicineCell SeparationChromatography, AffinityFlow CytometryLigandsLigandsCell purificationFACSImmunoaffinityMACSMicrofluidics

Identifiers

PMID32442784
PMCPMC10364325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.