Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42495720›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2026

Cell line authentication: a commercial service provider perspective.

Eleanor Ralston, Charlotte Haskayne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Eleanor RalstonBiofortuna Limited, Deeside, United Kingdom.
Charlotte HaskayneNorthGene™, Deeside, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell line misidentification and cross contamination continue to undermine research quality despite improved laboratory practices. Short Tandem Repeat (STR) profiling remains the primary method for human cell line authentication and is increasingly required by journals, funders, and regulatory bodies. Analysis of authentication data generated at NorthGene™ in 2024-2025 demonstrates that misidentification and contamination remain prevalent, with 4.7% of lines misidentified and 1.8% contaminated in 2024, and 2.4% misidentified with 1.6% contaminated in 2025. Primary cell lines present additional challenges, as none submitted during this period met ASN 0002 standards for full traceability, posing risks to reproducibility and downstream biological interpretation. Mixture analysis proved essential for resolving inconclusive STR results and identifying specific contaminants, although progress is hindered when reference STR profiles are not publicly available. While STR profiling is highly discriminatory for human cells, complementary methods-such as species specific PCR and CO1 barcoding-may be required to detect interspecies contamination or authenticate non human lines. Overall, these findings highlight the ongoing need for rigorous authentication workflows and complete traceability to ensure scientific integrity and prevent invalid research outcomes.

Indexed as

authenticationcross-contaminationmisidentificationmixture analysisprimary cell linesshort tandem repeat (STR) profiling

Identifiers

PMID42495720
PMCPMC13391863

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.