4.3 Article

Investigation of the mixed origins of the MGC-803 cell line reveals that it is a hybrid cell line derived from HeLa

Journal

HUMAN CELL
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s13577-023-01011-4

Keywords

Authentication; Cell line; Cross-contamination; Misidentification

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human cancer cell lines play a crucial role in cancer research, but it is important to ensure the authenticity of these cell lines. A study has found that the MGC-803 cell line, previously believed to be derived from gastric adenocarcinoma, is actually similar to the HeLa cell line and contains genetic material from human papilloma virus 18. Further analysis revealed that MGC-803 is a hybrid cell line derived from HeLa and cells from a different patient with Asian genetic ancestry.
Human cancer cell lines have an essential role in cancer research, but only authentic cell lines should be used as biological models. Authentication testing using short tandem repeat (STR) loci has shown that MGC-803 cells, which were reported to come from gastric adenocarcinoma, are similar to HeLa. In this study, we confirmed that the MGC-803 cell line contains genetic material from HeLa, including genetic sequence from human papilloma virus 18 (HPV18). Additional alleles were present on STR analysis that remained stable after extensive passaging and generation of mono-clones. This behavior is consistent with a hybrid cell line arising from cell-cell fusion. Further genetic analysis revealed that MGC-803 originated from donors with different genetic ancestries, one African (HeLa) and the other Asian. Transcriptomic analysis demonstrated that MGC-803 closely resembles HeLa and another nasopharyngeal-HeLa hybrid cell line CNE-2. Based on these findings, we conclude that MGC-803 is a hybrid cell line derived from HeLa and other cells, the latter derived from a different patient with Asian genetic ancestry.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available