Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35794354›Full record

ArticleDrug delivery and translational research2022

Standardization of an in vitro assay matrix to assess cytotoxicity of organic nanocarriers: a pilot interlaboratory comparison.

Kai Moritz Eder, Anne Marzi, Ane Marit Wågbø, Jolanda P Vermeulen, Liset J J de la Fonteyne-Blankestijn, Matthias Rösslein, Rainer Ossig, Geir Klinkenberg, Rob J Vandebriel, Jürgen Schnekenburger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug delivery and translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Advancing influenza virus treatment:Materials today. Bio · 2025
    Article
  4. Advances in Cytotoxicity Testing: From In Vitro Assays to In Silico Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. REFINE special issue.Drug delivery and translational research · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

10 authors.

Kai Moritz EderBiomedical Technology Center (BMTZ) of the Medical Faculty, University of Muenster, 48149, Münster, Germany. kai.eder@uni-muenster.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1646-8129
Anne MarziBiomedical Technology Center (BMTZ) of the Medical Faculty, University of Muenster, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Ane Marit WågbøSINTEF Materials and Chemistry (SINTEF), 7034, Trondheim, Norway.
Jolanda P VermeulenNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Liset J J de la Fonteyne-BlankestijnNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Matthias RössleinSwiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA), CH-9014, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Rainer OssigBiomedical Technology Center (BMTZ) of the Medical Faculty, University of Muenster, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Geir KlinkenbergSINTEF Materials and Chemistry (SINTEF), 7034, Trondheim, Norway.
Rob J VandebrielNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Jürgen SchnekenburgerBiomedical Technology Center (BMTZ) of the Medical Faculty, University of Muenster, 48149, Münster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanotechnologies such as nanoparticles are established components of new medical devices and pharmaceuticals. The use and distribution of these materials increases the requirement for standardized evaluation of possible adverse effects, starting with a general cytotoxicity screening. The Horizon 2020 project "Regulatory Science Framework for Nano(bio)material-based Medical Products and Devices (REFINE)" identified in vitro cytotoxicity quantification as a central task and first step for risk assessment and development for medical nanocarriers. We have performed an interlaboratory comparison on a cell-assay matrix including a kinetic lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release cell death and WST-8 cell viability assay adapted for testing organic nanocarriers in four well-characterized cell lines of different organ origins. Identical experiments were performed by three laboratories, namely the Biomedical Technology Center (BMTZ) of the University of Münster, SINTEF Materials and Chemistry (SINTEF), and the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) of the Netherlands according to new standard operating procedures (SOPs). The experiments confirmed that LipImage™ 815 lipidots

Indexed as

NanoparticlesCell LineCell SurvivalL-Lactate DehydrogenaseReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsL-Lactate DehydrogenaseCytotoxicityInterlaboratory comparisonIn vitroLDH release cell death assayOrganic nanoparticlesWST-8 cell viability assay

Identifiers

PMID35794354
PMCPMC9360155

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.