Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
A method using Cedex automatic cell counter (Innovatis) to determine the cell density and viability of a whole cell-based immunotherapy product has been developed and validated for the assay performance characteristics including specificity, accuracy, precision, linearity, range, and robustness. Instrument-to-instrument variation due to intrinsic differences in handmade flow cells was also evaluated. For cell density, Cedex demonstrated acceptable specificity, accuracy and precision for cell densities ranging from 3.13x10(5) to approximately 1.0x10(7)cells/mL, with intermediate precision of about 5% relative standard deviation (RSD). However, a marked difference was observed between the two instruments studied and they therefore could not be used interchangeably without additional calibration procedures that went beyond the manufacturer's recommendation. For viability, mixing known numbers of non-viable cells with highly viable cells allowed evaluation of the specificity, accuracy and linearity of the viability determination. Acceptable levels of accuracy (95.3-106.4% recovery) and precision (RSD<5%) were demonstrated for the viability range from 50 to 100%. The instrument-to-instrument difference was less than 4.6%. The assays for both cell density and viability were sufficiently robust for assay parameters. However, the effect of certain parameters was cell line-dependent, suggesting that Cedex performance should be verified for each cell line of interest.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2010.01.009 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!