Abstract

BackgroundThe tetrazolium-based MTT assay has long been regarded as the gold standard of cytotoxicity assays as it is highly sensitive and has been miniaturised for use as a high-throughput screening assay. However, various reports refer to interference by different test compounds, including the glycolysis inhibitor 3-bromopyruvate, with the conversion of the dye to coloured formazan crystals. This study assessed the linear range and reproducibility of three commonly used cell enumeration assays; the neutral red uptake (NRU), resazurin reduction (RES) and sulforhodamine B (SRB) assays, in comparison to the MTT assay. Interference between the MTT assay and three glycolysis inhibitors, 2-deoxyglucose, 3-bromopyruvate and lonidamine, was investigated.ResultsData indicate that the NRU, RES and SRB assays showed the smallest variability across the linear range, while the largest variation was observed for the MTT assay. This implies that these assays would more accurately detect small changes in cell number than the MTT assay. The SRB assay provided the most reproducible results as indicated by the coefficient of determination after a limited number of experiments. The SRB assay also produced the lowest variance in the derived 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50), while IC50 concentrations of 3-bromopyruvate could not be detected using either the MTT or RES assays after 24 hours incubation. Interference in the MTT assay was observed for all three tested glycolysis inhibitors in a cell-free environment. No interferences were observed for the NRU, SRB or RES assays.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that the MTT assay was not the best assay in a number of parameters that must be considered when a cell enumeration assay is selected: the MTT assay was less accurate in detecting changes in cell number as indicated by the variation observed in the linear range, had the highest variation when the IC50 concentrations of the glycolysis inhibitors were determined, and interference between the MTT assay and all the glycolysis inhibitors tested were observed. The SRB assay performed best overall considering all of the parameters, suggesting that it is the most suitable assay for use in preclinical screening of novel therapeutic compounds with oxido-reductive potential.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-015-1000-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • The tetrazolium-based MTT assay has long been regarded as the gold standard of cytotoxicity assays as it is highly sensitive and has been miniaturised for use as a high-throughput screening assay

  • Several modifications, including the addition of DMF to solubilise the formazan in aqueous medium [6] or removing excess dye with gentle aspiration and washing with Phosphate buffered saline (PBS) followed by solubilising the formazan crystals in Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) [7] improved the simplicity and sensitivity of this assay

  • This study compared the cell enumeration assays based on linear range, reproducibility and interference with glycolysis inhibitors

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The tetrazolium-based MTT assay has long been regarded as the gold standard of cytotoxicity assays as it is highly sensitive and has been miniaturised for use as a high-throughput screening assay. The 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl-2H-tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay has become the gold standard for determination of cell viability and proliferation since its development by Mosmann in the 1980′s [3]. This assay measures cell viability in terms of reductive activity as enzymatic conversion of the tetrazolium compound to water insoluble formazan crystals by dehydrogenases occurring in the mitochondria of living cells reducing agents and enzymes located in other organelles such as the endoplasmic reticulum are involved [4,5]. Several tetrazolium-based assays, such as the XTT [8], MTS [9] and WST [10] assays, in which water soluble formazan products are generated, eliminating the need for washing and solvent solubilisation steps, have been developed but have not replaced the well-established MTT assay

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call