ArticleBMC genomics2025
Cell line authentication using optical genome mapping.
Article in BMC genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundCell line authentication and karyotype assessment are two critical quality control tests that should be performed when using cell lines for biologic research and are expected measurements for cell therapy development. The current paradigm requires two separate measurements to assess these attributes, therefore a single straightforward approach that could assess karyotype and authenticate cell lines is beneficial.
resultsWe have developed a new optical genome mapping based approach named OGM-ID which can authenticate cell lines utilizing the same data that has previously been demonstrated as an alternative for traditional karyotyping. OGM-ID utilizes genome wide large (> 500 bp) insertions and deletions to uniquely identify cell lines. OGM-ID can be used to determine interspecies and intraspecies contamination. Benchmarking of OGM-ID was performed using three different family lineages, where replicates were clearly identified, and the relative genetic distance between individuals could be further monitored utilizing the zygosity of variants. Additionally, the donor of wild type and edited iPSCs was correctly determined even after multiple clonal selection events. Current limitations of OGM-ID require control around the version of Bionano Solve used and similar depths of coverage between samples.
conclusionsOGM-ID is a whole genome technique that produces results comparable to other cell line authentication techniques with the added benefit of obtaining a cell line’s karyotype simultaneously. OGM-ID’s ability to distinguish large insertions or deletions, which are common in genome editing, also gives it a unique ability to distinguish between multiple clonal iPSC-derived allogeneic cell product candidates derived from the same donor.
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.