Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34571016›Full record

ArticleJournal of lipid research2021

Lysis reagents, cell numbers, and calculation method influence high-throughput measurement of HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux capacity.

Johanna F Schachtl-Riess, Stefan Coassin, Claudia Lamina, Egon Demetz, Gertraud Streiter, Richard Hilbe, Florian Kronenberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of lipid research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Johanna F Schachtl-RiessDepartment of Genetics and Pharmacology, Institute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Stefan CoassinDepartment of Genetics and Pharmacology, Institute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Claudia LaminaDepartment of Genetics and Pharmacology, Institute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Egon DemetzDepartment of Internal Medicine II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Gertraud StreiterDepartment of Genetics and Pharmacology, Institute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Richard HilbeDepartment of Internal Medicine II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Florian KronenbergDepartment of Genetics and Pharmacology, Institute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Electronic address: Florian.Kronenberg@i-med.ac.at.
Innsbruck Medical University · AT

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF W 1253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC) may protect against cardiovascular disease. However, CEC assays are not standardized, hampering their application in large cohorts and comparison between studies. To improve standardization, we systematically investigated technical differences between existing protocols that influence assay performance that have not been previously addressed. CEC was measured in 96-well plates using J774A.1 macrophages labeled with BODIPY-cholesterol and incubated for 4 h with 2% apolipoprotein B-depleted human serum. The time zero method, which calculates CEC using control wells, and the per-well method, which calculates CEC based on the actual content of BODIPY-cholesterol in each well, were compared in 506 samples. We showed that the per-well method had a considerably lower sample rejection rate (4.74% vs. 13.44%) and intra-assay (4.48% vs. 5.28%) and interassay coefficients of variation (two controls: 7.85%, 9.86% vs. 13.58%, 15.29%) compared with the time zero method. Correction for plate-to-plate differences using four controls on each plate also improved assay performance of both methods. In addition, we observed that the lysis reagent used had a significant effect. Compared with cholic acid, lysis with sodium hydroxide results in higher (P = 0.0082) and Triton X-100 in lower (P = 0.0028) CEC values. Furthermore, large cell seeding errors (30% variation) greatly biased CEC for both referencing methods (P < 0.0001) as measured by a resazurin assay. In conclusion, lysis reagents, cell numbers, and assay setup greatly impact the quality and reliability of CEC quantification and should be considered when this method is newly established in a laboratory.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Screening AssaysAnimalsCell CountCell LineCholesterolCholesterol, HDLFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiceCholesterolCholesterol, HDLABCA1apolipoproteinsassay performanceCEC assaycholesterol/effluxHDLHDL functionalitymacrophagesreverse cholesterol transport

Identifiers

PMID34571016
PMCPMC8521207
OpenAlexW3201721952

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.