By Mette Soendergaard
•
November 3, 2022
Movember is a month-long campaign that raises awareness about men's health issues, such as prostate cancer , testicular cancer , and mental health. At Cell Origins , we participate in Movember by highlighting the importance of prostate cancer research and how the correct use of cell lines play a crucial role. Prostate Cancer Prostate cancer is one of the most common types of malignancies, affecting an estimated 1 in 7 men during their lifetime. In many cases, prostate cancer grows slowly and remains confined to the prostate gland. However, some types of prostate cancer are aggressive and can metastasize quickly to other parts of the body. Early diagnosis and treatment are key for improving survival rates among men with prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is typically diagnosed by performing a digital rectal exam and prostate-specific antigen ( PSA ) test. Often additional imaging, such as transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as biopsy procedures are needed to confirm a diagnosis. Several treatment options for prostate cancer are available, and these most often include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, immune, and hormone therapy. Initially, a prostatectomy , which involves partial or complete removal of the prostate, is performed in combination with other treatments, most often radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy ( ADT ). Chemotherapy using docetaxel or the hormone drug abiraterone is typically added to the treatment regimen when prostate cancer is diagnosed at later stages. Cell Lines are Important Tools in Prostate Cancer Research Cell lines are essential tools in prostate cancer research, allowing scientists to study and explore the cellular mechanisms of the disease. Such studies have led researchers to discover new chemo- and immuno-therapies, develop more effective diagnostic methods, and elucidate central genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic signatures. However, continuous research is needed to further the development of more efficient diagnostic and therapeutic methods. Unfortunately, cell line contamination, misidentification, and phenotypic drifting due to changes in cell culturing can greatly impact the reproducibility and accuracy of research data. The Use of Contaminated and Misidentified Cell Lines The persistent existence of contaminated and misidentified cell lines (CMCL) within the scientific community is a major problem that has significant implications for scientific research [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]. Such CMCLs have unknowingly been utilized in scientific studies for decades, which has likely significantly impacted the advancement of cancer research [ 5 ]. For example, HeLa contamination was first noted in the 1960s and continues to be an issue today [ 6 ]. Cell line contamination is usually caused by human error, such as using improper sterile techniques when handling the cells. Misidentification can happen for a number of reasons, but it is often due to cross-contamination between different cell lines. Both contamination and misidentification can introduce significant errors and lead to inaccurate conclusions. Additional problems of over-cultivating cell lines are also beginning to be addressed within the literature [ 7 , 8 ]. Culturing cell lines for too long with various unintentional selective pressures such as temperature, pH changes, and nutrient availability results in phenotypic drifting. A myriad of altered gene expression profiles that leads to diverse morphologies and biomarker expression can then impact the reproducibility of your experiments, as well as the accuracy of your data. Thus, replicating experiments becomes difficult if not impossible depending on how many variations in cell culture have taken place. Currently, it is estimated that CMCLs and phenotypically drifted cell lines are used in 20-30% of published data [ 9 ]. Given these concerns, it is critical that researchers are aware of the risks associated with using CMCLs and take steps to prevent their continued use. Probing Three Tiers of Biology Unfortunately, there is currently no widely available and standardized method that combines cell line verification and monitoring of phenotypic changes. Short tandem repeat (STR) analysis is the most common method of cell line identification and was standardized by the American National Standards Institute ( ANSI ) and American Type Culture Collection ( ATCC ). However, this method fails to detect mutations outside of the amplicon regions as well as changes in cellular phenotypes. The growing need to develop new methods for the identification and phenotypic characterization of cell lines was identified by the National Institute of Health ( NIH ). Cell Origins was awarded a small business innovation research ( SBIR ) grant from the NIH in 2019 to address this need. Specifically, we are developing a phage-based method to probe changes to the three tiers of biology (genomic, transcriptomic, and phenotypic) that occur as a result of altered cell culture conditions such as prolonged passaging. Phage Clones Detect Changes in Culture Conditions of a Prostate Cancer Cell Line At Cell Origins, we have used phage display technology to develop phage clones that can discern the phenotypic changes resulting from prolonged culturing of the prostate cancer cell line, LNCaP . Phage display is a technology used to identify peptides and antibodies that bind to the desired target molecule. For our product, we used phage display technology to identify phage clones that specifically bind to LNCaP biomarkers that are differentially expressed at different passage numbers of cultures. Combined with genomic and transcriptomic analysis, this allows us to discern if the cells have significantly drifted and can no longer be considered the same as the originally purchased cells. Currently, our technology is limited to the prostate cancer cell line LNCaP. However, we are busy in our research and development laboratory developing phage clones that can identify and detect changes to the most common cell lines distributed by the ATCC. We envision that our phage-based technology will be used in research laboratories to prevent the use of CMCLs in experiments and to ascertain phenotypic characteristics. We suggest that researchers periodically evaluate their cell lines in this manner. If the researcher is not amenable to the removal of questionable or over-cultured cell lines from their laboratory, they may instead report the genomic, transcriptomic, and phenotypic characteristics along with the experimental results. This added information will aid in the scientific community’s ability to evaluate published data. We Are Looking for Beta-Testers The Cell Origins team is excited to announce the development of our technology to authenticate cell lines and determine phenotypic drift. This technology will enable the standardization of mammalian cell culture and will help researchers ensure that their data is reproducible. We are currently looking for beta testers for our product, and we hope that you will consider joining us. Our technology is able to identify and monitor cultured cell lines for phenotypic drift that results from changes in culturing so that you can ensure the quality of your data. To become a beta tester, please contact us . We look forward to working with you! Summary At Cell Origins, we celebrate Movember by raising awareness about the importance of continued prostate cancer research and how cell lines play a key role in this. Unfortunately, cell line contamination, misidentification, and phenotypic drifting due to human errors and changes in cell culturing can impact the reproducibility and accuracy of data. Cell Origins is working to improve the accuracy of data in prostate cancer research by developing a new technology that can identify cell lines and ascertain phenotypic drifting. This is important work that has the potential to advance prostate cancer research to improve the outcomes for patients suffering from this disease. Please contact us if you are interested in beta testing our technology and learning more. Further Readings Movember https://us.movember.com/ American Cancer Society https://www.cancer.org/cancer/prostate-cancer.html National Cancer Institute https://www.cancer.gov/types/prostate Prostate Cancer Foundation https://www.pcf.org/ Center for Disease Control and Prevention https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/prostate/basic_info/index.htm References [1] Horbach SPJM, Halffman W. The ghosts of HeLa: How cell line misidentification contaminates the scientific literature. PLoS One. 2017 Oct 12;12(10):e0186281. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186281. PMID: 29023500; PMCID: PMC5638414. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186281 [2] Capes-Davis A, Theodosopoulos G, Atkin I, Drexler HG, Kohara A, MacLeod RA, Masters JR, Nakamura Y, Reid YA, Reddel RR, Freshney RI. Check your cultures! A list of cross-contaminated or misidentified cell lines. Int J Cancer. 2010 Jul 1;127(1):1-8. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25242. PMID: 20143388. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.25242 [3] Freedman LP. Know Thy Cells: Improving Biomedical Research Reproducibility. Sci Transl Med. 2015 Jul 1;7(294):294ed7. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aac7112. PMID: 26136474. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.aac7112 [4] Vaughan L, Glänzel W, Korch C, Capes-Davis A. Widespread Use of Misidentified Cell Line KB (HeLa): Incorrect Attribution and Its Impact Revealed through Mining the Scientific Literature. Cancer Res. 2017 Jun 1;77(11):2784-2788. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-2258. Epub 2017 Apr 28. PMID: 28455420. https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/77/11/2784/616254/Widespread-Use-of-Misidentified-Cell-Line-KB-HeLa [5] Freedman LP, Cockburn IM, Simcoe TS. The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research. PLoS Biol. 2015 Jun 9;13(6):e1002165. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002165. Erratum in: PLoS Biol. 2018 Apr 10;16(4):e1002626. PMID: 26057340; PMCID: PMC4461318. https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002165 [6] Lavappa KS, Macy ML, Shannon JE. Examination of ATCC stocks for HeLa marker chromosomes in human cell lines. Nature. 1976 Jan 22;259(5540):211-3. doi: 10.1038/259211a0. PMID: 1250349. https://www.nature.com/articles/259211a0 [7] Hughes P, Marshall D, Reid Y, Parkes H, Gelber C. The costs of using unauthenticated, over-passaged cell lines: how much more data do we need? Biotechniques. 2007 Nov;43(5):575, 577-8, 581-2 passim. doi: 10.2144/000112598. Erratum in: Biotechniques. 2008 Jan;44(1):47. PMID: 18072586. https://www.future-science.com/doi/full/10.2144/000112598?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org [8] Masters JR, Stacey GN. Changing medium and passaging cell lines. Nat Protoc. 2007;2(9):2276-84. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2007.319. PMID: 17853884. https://www.nature.com/articles/nprot.2007.319 [9] Lacroix M. Persistent use of "false" cell lines. Int J Cancer. 2008 Jan 1;122(1):1-4. doi: 10.1002/ijc.23233. PMID: 17960586. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.23233