In vitro toxicology testing: choosing the readout before the plate

Designing the assay

1. State the question as an endpoint. Is the question whether cells die, whether they stop dividing, or whether a pathway is perturbed? Those are three different endpoints and three different assays, and a single viability number cannot distinguish them.
2. Know what each dye actually reports. Tetrazolium reduction reports metabolic activity. Nucleic acid exclusion dyes report membrane integrity. Protease and ATP based assays report other proxies again. Compounds that affect metabolism directly will confound the first without killing anything.
3. Run a time course before fixing a timepoint. Toxicity develops, and a single endpoint chosen for convenience can sit before or after the effect. One time course experiment makes every subsequent single timepoint interpretable.
4. Control for compound interference. Coloured and fluorescent compounds interfere with plate readouts directly. Include compound only wells without cells, and check for absorbance or fluorescence at the read wavelength before concluding anything.
5. Decide whether imaging is worth its pipeline. High content imaging gives per cell information and mechanistic detail, and it brings an analysis burden that has to be resourced. Buy it when the mechanism matters, not because it produces more data.
6. Decide in house against a contract laboratory. Where results must be signed under a quality system, a contract laboratory brings the system, the trained staff and the documentation. In house work suits screening and mechanism where speed and iteration matter more.

Proxies and what they miss

A compound that inhibits mitochondrial function will reduce a metabolic readout dramatically while leaving cells alive and recoverable. A compound that arrests division will reduce total signal in any assay that scales with cell number, without killing anything. Both are commonly reported as toxicity.

Running one metabolic and one integrity assay, plus a count on the hits, resolves nearly all of these ambiguities and costs one extra plate.

Plate effects are the other half of the noise

Evaporation at the edges, uneven seeding and gradients in the incubator all produce patterns that look like dose responses. Randomising treatment position across the plate and using inner wells for the samples that matter removes most of it.

Include a uniformity plate in method development: same cells, same treatment, every well. The pattern it reveals will inform every plate layout afterwards.

A toxicology lab, and what toxicology labs actually run

Toxicology divides into work on cells and work on animals, and a laboratory usually does one. In vitro laboratories run cytotoxicity, genotoxicity screens such as Ames and micronucleus, skin and eye irritation on reconstructed tissue, and receptor and enzyme panels, under good laboratory practice where a submission requires it. In vivo laboratories run acute and repeat dose studies, safety pharmacology and reproductive work under their own licences and welfare oversight. Ask which studies are in house, which are subcontracted, and what the study director's own experience of your class is.

toxicology lab equipment, and what the in vitro bench needs

An in vitro toxicology bench is a cell culture laboratory with reading capacity attached: cabinets and incubators, a plate reader covering absorbance, fluorescence and luminescence, an imaging system for high content endpoints, a flow cytometer for cell cycle and apoptosis, and a liquid handler once plate counts rise. Around it sit the things a regulated study needs: calibrated pipettes with records, controlled storage with alarms, an archive for raw data, and a quality system, which is usually the real cost of moving from research work to a study that can be submitted.

A viral plaque assay and what it counts

A viral plaque assay counts infectious particles by the holes they clear in a cell monolayer, which measures infectivity rather than particle number, and the two differ by orders of magnitude for most preparations. Overlay consistency and the monolayer's confluence are what make counts comparable between plates.

ore testing laboratories and the sampling behind the assay

ore testing laboratories report grade by fire assay or by acid digestion and instrumental analysis, and the result is dominated by sampling and preparation rather than by the instrument, because an ore is heterogeneous at every scale. A stated crushing, splitting and pulverising protocol is what makes a grade defensible.

A cannabis testing machine, and what the panel needs

A cannabis testing machine is not one instrument: potency is chromatography with ultraviolet detection, residual solvents are gas chromatography, pesticides and mycotoxins need mass spectrometry and heavy metals need an elemental instrument. A laboratory buying one machine can serve one part of the required panel.

temperature mapping and what it proves

temperature mapping places distributed sensors through a chamber or a store to find its warmest and coldest points under load, which is what a monitoring position has to be chosen from rather than assumed. The map is repeated after any change to the space or its loading pattern, since the extremes move.

Common questions

Why do my MTS assay and other viability assays disagree?

Because they measure different things. Metabolic assays respond before cell death and can be affected directly by the compound; membrane integrity assays report a late event. Disagreement is information rather than a fault, and running two is often the right answer.

Is counting cells better?

It is closer to the endpoint most people mean, and it distinguishes reduced proliferation from cell death, which single dye assays cannot. It costs more effort per plate, which is why it is often reserved for confirming a hit.

When is high content imaging justified?

When the mechanism of the effect matters, when subpopulations are important, or when several endpoints must be measured on the same cells. It is not justified simply because a plate reader seems limited.

Do these assays predict in vivo toxicity?

Partially and inconsistently, which is why they are used for ranking and mechanism rather than for prediction. Being explicit about that in the study report avoids the result being over interpreted later.

Browse by service class

• Compare Gene synthesis on advertised prices