Single cell analysis of Chinese hamster ovary cells during a bioprocess using a novel dynamic imaging system.
CHO cells
PharmaFlow
bioprocess
cell viability
Journal
Biotechnology progress
ISSN: 1520-6033
Titre abrégé: Biotechnol Prog
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8506292
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Apr 2024
13 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
27
03
2024
received:
20
12
2023
accepted:
29
03
2024
medline:
13
4
2024
pubmed:
13
4
2024
entrez:
13
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Reliable monitoring of mammalian cells in bioreactors is essential to biopharmaceutical production. Trypan blue exclusion is a method of determining cell density and viability that has been used for over one hundred years to monitor cells in culture and is the current standard method in biomanufacturing. This method has many disadvantages however and there is a growing demand for more detailed and in-line measurements of cell growth in bioreactors. This article assesses a novel dynamic imaging system for single cell analysis. This data shows that comparable total cell density, viable cell density and percentage viability data shown here, generated by the imaging system, aligned well with conventional trypan blue counting methods for an industrially relevant Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cell line. Furthermore, detailed statistical analysis shows that the classification system used by the PharmaFlow system can reveal trends of interest in monitoring the health of mammalian cells over a 6-day bioreactor culture. The system is also capable of sampling at-line, removing the necessity for taking samples off-line and enabling real time monitoring of cells in a bioreactor culture.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e3469Subventions
Organisme : Enterprise Ireland
ID : IP/2019/0830
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Biotechnology Progress published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
Références
Ducommun P, Kadouri A, von Stockar U, Marison IW. On‐line determination of animal cell concentration in two industrial high‐density culture processes by dielectric spectroscopy. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2002;77(3):316‐323. doi:10.1002/bit.1197
Teixeira AP, Oliveira R, Alves PM, Carrondo MJT. Advances in on‐line monitoring and control of mammalian cell cultures: supporting the PAT initiative. Biotechnol Adv. 2009;27(6):726‐732. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2009.05.003
Hanson MA, Ge X, Kostov Y, Brorson KA, Moreira AR, Rao G. Comparisons of optical pH and dissolved oxygen sensors with traditional electrochemical probes during mammalian cell culture. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2007;97(4):833‐841. doi:10.1002/bit.21320
Butler M, Spearman M. Cell counting and viability measurements. In: Pörtner R, ed. Animal Cell Biotechnology: Methods and Protocols. Humana Press (Methods in Biotechnology); 2007:205‐222. doi:10.1007/978‐1‐59745‐399‐8_8
Altman SA, Randers L, Rao G. Comparison of trypan blue dye exclusion and fluorometric assays for mammalian cell viability determinations. Biotechnol Prog. 1993;9(6):671‐674. doi:10.1021/bp00024a017
Patterson MK. [11] Measurement of growth and viability of cells in culture. Methods in Enzymology. Academic Press (Cell Culture); 1979:141‐152. doi:10.1016/S0076‐6879(79)58132‐4
Mascotti K, McCullough J, Burger SR. HPC viability measurement: trypan blue versus acridine orange and propidium iodide. Transfusion. 2000;40(6):693‐696. doi:10.1046/j.1537‐2995.2000.40060693.x
Johnson S, Nguyen V, Coder D. Assessment of Cell Viability’. Current Protocols in Cytometry, Chapter 9; 2013:9.2.
Cadena‐Herrera D, Esparza‐de Lara JE, Ramírez‐Ibañez ND, et al. Validation of three viable‐cell counting methods: manual, semi‐automated, and automated. Biotechnol Rep. 2015;7:9‐16. doi:10.1016/j.btre.2015.04.004
Louis KS, Siegel AC. Cell viability analysis using trypan blue: manual and automated methods. Method Molecul Biol. 2011;740:7‐12. doi:10.1007/978‐1‐61779‐108‐6_2
Rathore AS, Mishra S, Saxena N, Nain P. Bioprocess control: Current progress and future perspectives. Life. 2021;11(6):557. doi:10.3390/life11060557
Whitford B. Bioprocess intensification: aspirations and achievements. BioTechniques. 2020;69(2):84‐87. doi:10.2144/btn‐2020‐0072
Kim KR, Yeo W‐H. Advances in sensor developments for cell culture monitoring. BMEMat. 2023;1(4): e12063. doi:10.1002/bmm2.12047
Fung Shek C, Betenbaugh M. Taking the pulse of bioprocesses: at‐line and in‐line monitoring of mammalian cell cultures. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2021;71:191‐197. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2021.08.007
Mira P, Yeh P, Hall BG. Estimating microbial population data from optical density. PLoS One. 2022;17(10):e0276040. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0276040
Yamane T. Application of an on‐line turbidimeter for the automation of fed‐batch cultures. Biotechnol Prog. 1993;9(1):81‐85. doi:10.1021/bp00019a012
Konstantinov KB, Pambayun R, Mataguihan R, Yoshida T, Perusicn CM, Hu WS. On‐line monitoring of hybridoma cell growth using a laser turbidity sensor. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1992;40(11):1337‐1342. doi:10.1002/bit.260401107
Kroll P, Stelzer IV, Herwig C. Soft sensor for monitoring biomass subpopulations in mammalian cell culture processes. Biotechnol Lett. 2017;39(11):1667‐1673. doi:10.1007/s10529‐017‐2408‐0
Bergin A, Carvell J, Butler M. Applications of bio‐capacitance to cell culture manufacturing. Biotechnol Adv. 2022;61:108048. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2022.108048
Austin GD, Watson RW, D'Amore T. Studies of on‐line viable yeast biomass with a capacitance biomass monitor. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1994;43(4):337‐341. doi:10.1002/bit.260430411
Verduijn J, van der Meeren L, Krysko DV, Skirtach AG. Deep learning with digital holographic microscopy discriminates apoptosis and necroptosis. Cell Death Dis. 2021;7:229. doi:10.1038/s41420‐021‐00616‐8
Scholz I, Montoya C, Vela E. Examination of vesicular stomatitis virus‐induced morphology changes in individual Vero cells by QMod microscopy. BioTechniques. 2020;68(6):305‐310. doi:10.2144/btn‐2019‐0137
Sargent B. Continuous suspension cell culture monitoring in bioreactors using quantitative phase imaging. Cell Culture Dish. 2017; Available at: https://cellculturedish.com/continuous-suspension-cell-culture-monitoring-in-bioreactors-using-quantitative-phase-imaging/ (Accessed: 22 February 2024)
Zhang J, Liu X, Bell A, et al. Transient expression and purification of chimeric heavy chain antibodies. Protein Expr Purif. 2009;65(1):77‐82. doi:10.1016/j.pep.2008.10.011
JM Canty. PharmaFlow. JM Canty; 2021 Available at: http://www.jmcanty.com/product/2604/ (Accessed: 2 December 2021)
Corredor C, Ketcham SA, McHugh K, Lane G, Vale N, Rehmann M, Both D. Process analytical technologies (PAT) applications for upstream biologics. Am Pharm Rev. 2022.
McHugh K. Correlation of Online and Offline Techniques to Measure CHO Cell Health. Upstream Bio‐Process Development. Bioprocessing Summit. Cambridge HealthTech; 2021.
Beutel S, Henkel S. In situ sensor techniques in modern bioprocess monitoring. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2011;91(6):1493‐1505. doi:10.1007/s00253‐011‐3470‐5
Pappenheimer AN. Experimental studies upon lymphocytes. J Exp Med. 1917;25(5):633‐650.
Butler M, Bergin A, Braasch K, Salimi E. The case for re‐evaluating cell viability in bioprocesses. Bioproc Int. 2019;17:11‐12.
Afshar S, Salimi E, Fazelkhah A, Braasch K, Mishra N, Butler M. Progression of change in membrane capacitance and cytoplasm conductivity of cells during controlled starvation using dual‐frequency DEP cytometry. Anal Chim Acta. 2019;1059:59‐67. doi:10.1016/j.aca.2019.01.046
Fazelkhah A, Afshar S, Braasch K, et al. Cytoplasmic conductivity as a marker for bioprocess monitoring: study of Chinese hamster ovary cells under nutrient deprivation and reintroduction. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2019;116(11):2896‐2905. doi:10.1002/bit.27115
O'Flaherty R, Bergin A, Flampouri E, Mota LM, Obaidi I, Quigley A, Xie Y, Butler M. Mammalian cell culture for production of recombinant proteins: a review of the critical steps in their biomanufacturing. Biotechnol Adv. 2020;43:107552. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2020.107552
Villacrés C, Tayi VS, Butler M. Strategic feeding of NS0 and CHO cell cultures to control glycan profiles and immunogenic epitopes of monoclonal antibodies. J Biotechnol. 2021;333:49‐62. doi:10.1016/j.jbiotec.2021.04.005
Braasch K, Nikolic‐Jaric M, Cabel T, et al. The changing dielectric properties of CHO cells can be used to determine early apoptotic events in a bioprocess. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2013;110(11):2902‐2914. doi:10.1002/bit.24976
Fan R, Ebrahimi M, Quitmann H, Aden M, Czermak P. An innovative optical sensor for the online monitoring and control of biomass concentration in a membrane bioreactor system for lactic acid production. Sensors. 2016;16(3):E411. doi:10.3390/s16030411
Geinitz B, Rehmann L, Büchs J, Regestein L. Noninvasive tool for optical online monitoring of individual biomass concentrations in a defined coculture. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2020;117(4):999‐1011. doi:10.1002/bit.27256
Ude C, Schmidt‐Hager J, Findeis M, John GT, Scheper T, Beutel S. Application of an online‐biomass sensor in an optical multisensory platform prototype for growth monitoring of biotechnical relevant microorganism and cell lines in single‐use shake flasks. Sensors. 2014;14(9):17390‐17405. doi:10.3390/s140917390
Aijaz A, Trawinski D, McKirgan S, Parekkadan B. Non‐invasive cell counting of adherent, suspended and encapsulated mammalian cells using optical density. BioTechniques. 2020;68(1):35‐40. doi:10.2144/btn‐2019‐0052
Rue SM, Anderson PW, Miller JM, et al. Mammalian cell culture density determination using a laser through‐beam sensor. BioTechniques. 2018;65(4):224‐226. doi:10.2144/btn‐2018‐0059
Rosenberg JN, Cady NC. Surveilling cellular vital signs: toward label‐free biosensors and real‐time viability assays for bioprocessing. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2021;71:123‐129. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2021.07.004
Booij TH, Price LS, Danen EHJ. 3D cell‐based assays for drug screens: challenges in imaging, image analysis, and high‐content analysis. SLAS Discovery. 2019;24(6):615‐627. doi:10.1177/2472555219830087
Cacopardo L, Costa J, Giusti S, et al. Real‐time cellular impedance monitoring and imaging of biological barriers in a dual‐flow membrane bioreactor. Biosens Bioelectron. 2019;140:111340. doi:10.1016/j.bios.2019.111340
Bar A, Ruvinov E, Cohen S. Live imaging flow bioreactor for the simulation of articular cartilage regeneration after treatment with bioactive hydrogel. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2018;115(9):2205‐2216. doi:10.1002/bit.26736
Schädli GN, Vetsch JR, Baumann RP, et al. Time‐lapsed imaging of nanocomposite scaffolds reveals increased bone formation in dynamic compression bioreactors. Commun Biol. 2021;4(1):110. doi:10.1038/s42003‐020‐01635‐4
Allier C, Bordy T, Cioni O, Herve L, Esteban G, Pisaneschi M, Morales S. Label‐free cell viability assay using lens‐free microscopy. Imaging, Manipulation, and Analysis of Biomolecules, Cells, and Tissues XVI. Imaging, Manipulation, and Analysis of Biomolecules, Cells, and Tissues XVI. SPIE; 2018:42‐48. doi:10.1117/12.2289811
Lu H, Caen O, Vrignon J, et al. High throughput single cell counting in droplet‐based microfluidics. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1366. doi:10.1038/s41598‐017‐01454‐4
Imashiro C, Tokuoka Y, Kikuhara K, Yamada TG, Takemura K, Funahashi A. Direct cell counting using macro‐scale smartphone images of cell aggregates. IEEE Access. 2020;8:170033‐170043. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3024100
Lourenço ND, Lopes JA, Almeida CF, Sarraguça MC, Pinheiro HM. Bioreactor monitoring with spectroscopy and chemometrics: a review. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;404(4):1211‐1237. doi:10.1007/s00216‐012‐6073‐9
Wang X, Zhou G, Liang L, et al. Deep learning‐based image analysis for in situ microscopic imaging of cell culture process. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 2024;129:107621. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2023.107621
Mercier SM, Diepenbroek B, Dalm MCF, Wijffels RH, Streefland M. Multivariate data analysis as a PAT tool for early bioprocess development data. J Biotechnol. 2013;167(3):262‐270. doi:10.1016/j.jbiotec.2013.07.006
Metze S, Blioch S, Matuszczyk J, et al. Multivariate data analysis of capacitance frequency scanning for online monitoring of viable cell concentrations in small‐scale bioreactors. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2020;412(9):2089‐2102. doi:10.1007/s00216‐019‐02096‐3