|
1
|
Cai Y, Prochazkova M, Kim YS, Jiang C, Ma J, Moses L, Martin K, Pham V, Zhang N, Highfill SL, Somerville RP, Stroncek DF, Jin P. Assessment and comparison of viability assays for cellular products. Cytotherapy 2024; 26:201-209. [PMID: 38085197 PMCID: PMC10872314 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2023.11.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2023] [Revised: 11/06/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 02/03/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AIMS Accurate assessment of cell viability is crucial in cellular product manufacturing, yet selecting the appropriate viability assay presents challenges due to various factors. This study compares and evaluates different viability assays on fresh and cryopreserved cellular products, including peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) and peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) apheresis products, purified PBMCs and cultured chimeric antigen receptor and T-cell receptor-engineered T-cell products. METHODS Viability assays, including manual Trypan Blue exclusion, flow cytometry-based assays using 7-aminoactinomycin D (7-AAD) or propidium iodide (PI) direct staining or cell surface marker staining in conjunction with 7-AAD, Cellometer (Nexcelom Bioscience LLC, Lawrence, MA, USA) Acridine Orange/PI staining and Vi-CELL BLU Cell Viability Analyzer (Beckman Coulter, Inc, Brea, CA, USA), were evaluated. A viability standard was established using live and dead cell mixtures to assess the accuracy of these assays. Furthermore, precision assessment was conducted to determine the reproducibility of the viability assays. Additionally, the viability of individual cell populations from cryopreserved PBSC and PBMC apheresis products was examined. RESULTS All methods provided accurate viability measurements and generated consistent and reproducible viability data. The assessed viability assays were demonstrated to be reliable alternatives when evaluating the viability of fresh cellular products. However, cryopreserved products exhibited variability among the tested assays. Additionally, analyzing the viability of each subset of the cryopreserved PBSC and PBMC apheresis products revealed that T cells and granulocytes were more susceptible to the freeze-thaw process, showing decreased viability. CONCLUSIONS The study demonstrates the importance of careful assay selection, validation and standardization, particularly for assessing the viability of cryopreserved products. Given the complexity of cellular products, choosing a fit-for-purpose viability assay is essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yihua Cai
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Michaela Prochazkova
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Yong-Soo Kim
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Chunjie Jiang
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Jinxia Ma
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Larry Moses
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Kathryn Martin
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Victoria Pham
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Nan Zhang
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Steven L Highfill
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Robert P Somerville
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - David F Stroncek
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Ping Jin
- Center for Cellular Engineering, Department of Transfusion Medicine, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
| |
Collapse
|