It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Cancer drug development has been riddled with high attrition rates, in part, due to poor reproducibility of preclinical models for drug discovery. Poor experimental design and lack of scientific transparency may cause experimental biases that in turn affect data quality, robustness and reproducibility. Here, we pinpoint sources of experimental variability in conventional 2D cell-based cancer drug screens to determine the effect of confounders on cell viability for MCF7 and HCC38 breast cancer cell lines treated with platinum agents (cisplatin and carboplatin) and a proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib). Variance component analysis demonstrated that variations in cell viability were primarily associated with the choice of pharmaceutical drug and cell line, and less likely to be due to the type of growth medium or assay incubation time. Furthermore, careful consideration should be given to different methods of storing diluted pharmaceutical drugs and use of DMSO controls due to the potential risk of evaporation and the subsequent effect on dose-response curves. Optimization of experimental parameters not only improved data quality substantially but also resulted in reproducible results for bortezomib- and cisplatin-treated HCC38, MCF7, MCF-10A, and MDA-MB-436 cells. Taken together, these findings indicate that replicability (the same analyst re-performs the same experiment multiple times) and reproducibility (different analysts perform the same experiment using different experimental conditions) for cell-based drug screens can be improved by identifying potential confounders and subsequent optimization of experimental parameters for each cell line.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden (GRID:grid.8761.8) (ISNI:0000 0000 9919 9582)
2 Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden (GRID:grid.8761.8) (ISNI:0000 0000 9919 9582); Department of Clinical Pathology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden (GRID:grid.1649.a) (ISNI:000000009445082X)
3 Department of Radiation Physics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden (GRID:grid.8761.8) (ISNI:0000 0000 9919 9582)
4 Department of Clinical Pathology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden (GRID:grid.1649.a) (ISNI:000000009445082X)