Preview

Drug development & registration

Advanced search

Recommendations for Validation of Automated Viable Cell Counting Methods (Review)

https://doi.org/10.33380/2305-2066-2023-12-4-1424

Abstract

Introduction. The quality of viable cell-based products (such as biomedical cell products and advanced therapy medicinal products) must be maintained during the full production cycle to ensure their safety and efficacy for patients. The minimum required number of viable cells is one of the quality control criteria in the final product release specifications. This study looks into the process of validation of automated viable cell counting methods.

Text. The study reviewed the latest data on specific validation characteristics for automated cell counters as compared to manual counting methods. We identified the main problems with the validation methods. Based on the review of scientific and regulatory literature, we identified the key validation parameters, methods of their evaluation and measurement, and reporting of results. We described the validation algorithm for an automated cell counter, including such steps as the selection of reference standards, selection of the number of experimental points, experimental design, mathematical evaluation of the obtained results, and determination of the acceptance criteria.

Conclusion. Based on the data reviewed, the authors developed recommendations for the validation of automated viable cell counting procedures.

About the Authors

M. A. Vodyakova
Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products
Russian Federation

8/2, Petrovsky Blvd, Moscow, 127051



N. S. Pokrovsky
Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products
Russian Federation

8/2, Petrovsky Blvd, Moscow, 127051



E. V. Melnikova
Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products
Russian Federation

8/2, Petrovsky Blvd, Moscow, 127051



V. A. Merkulov
Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products
Russian Federation

8/2, Petrovsky Blvd, Moscow, 127051



References

1. Fagète S., Steimer C., Girod P. A. Comparing two automated high throughput viable-cell counting systems for cell culture applications. Journal of biotechnology. 2019;305:23–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2019.08.014.

2. Butler M., Spearman M. Cell counting and viability measurements. Animal Cell Biotechnology. 2007:205–222. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-59745-399-8_8.

3. Louis K. S., Siegel A. C. Cell viability analysis using trypan blue: manual and automated methods. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2011;740:7–12. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-61779-108-6_2.

4. Cadena-Herrera D. Validation of three viable-cell counting methods: Manual, semi-automated, and automated. Biotechnology Reports (Amsterdam). 2015;7:9–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.btre.2015.04.004.

5. Yurgel’ N. V., Mladentseva A. L., Bourdain A. V., editors. Guidance on the validation of methods for the analysis of medicinal products. Moscow: Association of Russian Pharmaceutical Manufacturers; 2007. 48 p. (In Russ.)

6. Bottová I., Lee L. Validation study of the Vi-CELL XR for dendritic cell counting. BioProcessing Journal. 2014;13(3):32–37. DOI: 10.12665/J133.BottovaLee.

7. Huang L. C. Validation of cell density and viability assays using Cedex automated cell counter. Biologicals. 2010;38(3):393–400. DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2010.01.009.

8. Hsiung F. Comparison of Count Reproducibility, Accuracy, and Time to Results between a Hemocytometer and the TC20 Automated Cell Counter. Bulletin 6003 Rev. B. 2013:1–4.

9. Solov’eva A. M., Aleksandrova S. A. Evaluation of readings of an automated cell counter. Tsitologiya. 2020;62(7):522–532. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31857/S0041377120070056.

10. Glantz A. S. Biomedical statistics. М.: Praktika; 1998. 459 p. (In Russ.)


Supplementary files

1. Графический абстракт
Subject
Type Other
View (1MB)    
Indexing metadata ▾

Review

For citations:


Vodyakova M.A., Pokrovsky N.S., Melnikova E.V., Merkulov V.A. Recommendations for Validation of Automated Viable Cell Counting Methods (Review). Drug development & registration. 2023;12(4):217-222. https://doi.org/10.33380/2305-2066-2023-12-4-1424

Views: 455


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2305-2066 (Print)
ISSN 2658-5049 (Online)