4.1 Article

Optimized alamarBlue assay protocol for drug dose-response determination of 3D tumor spheroids

期刊

METHODSX
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 781-787

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.mex.2018.07.011

关键词

Cell culture; Tumor spheroids; AlamarBlue; Metabolic activity; Dose-response

资金

  1. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [685817]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The assessment of drug-dose responses is vital for the prediction of unwanted toxicological effects in modern medicine. Three-dimensional (3D) cell cultures techniques can provide in vivo-like spheroids and microtissues that resemble natural tumor function. However, formation of necrotic core and diffusion limitation of chemical compounds within these models can reduce the reproducibility and precision of standard bioassay protocols used to test two-dimensional (2D) cell cultures. Nonetheless, the accurate prediction of detrimental effects of test compounds based on functional bioassays is essential for the development of new efficient therapeutic strategies. For instance, alamarBlue (R) is a widely-used commercially available redox indicator dye that can evaluate metabolic activity and cellular health status in a single-step procedure however, suitability and optimization of this bioassay must be determined for each individual application scenario. Here, we optimized the standard alamarBlue (R) proliferation/viability protocol for tumor spheroid cultures to enhance assay precision during toxicological drug screening. We optimized the original protocol of alamarBlue (R) assay that usually suggests an incubation time of 2-4 hours. The key modifications of the protocol for spheroid cultures are as follows: Aspiration of cell culture medium before drug exposure. Replacement of drug-supplemented medium with 10% (v/v) alamarBlue (R) reagent mixed with culture medium. Increase of incubation period to 24 h at 37 degrees C protected from light. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据