ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2021
Growth and eGFP Production of CHO-K1 Suspension Cells Cultivated From Single Cell to Laboratory Scale.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of intracellular radionuclide distribution in a Monte Carlo biophysical 3D multi-cellular model for targeted alpha therapy.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Protocol to perform dynamic microfluidic single-cell cultivation of C. glutamicum.STAR protocols · 2023Article
- Reliable cell retention of mammalian suspension cells in microfluidic cultivation chambers.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Genetically Encoded Ratiometric pH Sensors for the Measurement of Intra- and Extracellular pH and Internalization Rates.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Application of bioreactor technology for cell culture-based viral vaccine production: Present status and future prospects.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- N-1 semi-continuous transient perfusion in shake flask for ultra-high density seeding of CHO cell cultures in benchtop bioreactors.Biotechnology progressArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scaling down bioproduction processes has become a major driving force for more accelerated and efficient process development over the last decades. Especially expensive and time-consuming processes like the production of biopharmaceuticals with mammalian cell lines benefit clearly from miniaturization, due to higher parallelization and increased insights while at the same time decreasing experimental time and costs. Lately, novel microfluidic methods have been developed, especially microfluidic single-cell cultivation (MSCC) devices have been proved to be valuable to miniaturize the cultivation of mammalian cells. So far, growth characteristics of microfluidic cultivated cell lines were not systematically compared to larger cultivation scales; however, validation of a miniaturization tool against initial cultivation scales is mandatory to prove its applicability for bioprocess development. Here, we systematically investigate growth, morphology, and eGFP production of CHO-K1 cells in different cultivation scales ranging from a microfluidic chip (230 nl) to a shake flask (125 ml) and laboratory-scale stirred tank bioreactor (2.0 L). Our study shows a high comparability regarding specific growth rates, cellular diameters, and eGFP production, which proves the feasibility of MSCC as a miniaturized cultivation tool for mammalian cell culture. In addition, we demonstrate that MSCC provides insights into cellular heterogeneity and single-cell dynamics concerning growth and production behavior which, when occurring in bioproduction processes, might severely affect process robustness.
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.