4 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2018
    1. On 2017 Nov 24, Amanda Capes-Davis commented:

      Following up from the comment by Deilson Elgui de Oliviera, ICLAC has new data on MDA-MB-435 and its origin (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28940260).

      MDA-MB-435 came from the same donor as M14, a cell line that was established from a male with melanoma. Most publications have concluded that MDA-MB-435 is misidentified but the topic has been a controversial one. MDA-MB-435 can express breast-specific markers and its karyotype is XX, which would fit with its reported origin from a female with breast cancer.

      ICLAC went back to the original publications for these two cell lines and found that M14 was established and submitted for publication before MDA-MB-435. The originator, Dr Donald Morton, established a specimen repository at the John Wayne Cancer Institute (JWCI); we contacted JWCI to ask if early specimens were available. JWCI was able to supply early samples of the M14 cell line, a lymphoblastoid cell line from the same donor (ML14), and serum from the melanoma donor dating back to 1973. The originator's work made subsequent testing possible.

      Testing of these early samples showed that MDA-MB-435 came from the M14 donor, proving that MDA-MB-435 is misidentified. The XX karyotype was caused by chromosomal rearrangement; the donor's lymphoblastoid cell line is XY.

      This "Tale of Two Cell Lines" is a cautionary tale showing that phenotype can be misleading when working with cell lines. Always test your cell lines for authenticity. A cell line is itself a variable that can never be taken for granted.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Oct 24, Deilson Elgui de Oliveira commented:

      MDA-MB-435 devrivatives are listed as contaminated cell lines (M14 Human melanoma, CVCL_1395) in the ICLAC Database of Cross-Contaminated or Misidentified Cell Lines (Version 8.0, Publication Date 1/12/2016).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

  2. Feb 2018
    1. On 2017 Oct 24, Deilson Elgui de Oliveira commented:

      MDA-MB-435 devrivatives are listed as contaminated cell lines (M14 Human melanoma, CVCL_1395) in the ICLAC Database of Cross-Contaminated or Misidentified Cell Lines (Version 8.0, Publication Date 1/12/2016).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Nov 24, Amanda Capes-Davis commented:

      Following up from the comment by Deilson Elgui de Oliviera, ICLAC has new data on MDA-MB-435 and its origin (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28940260).

      MDA-MB-435 came from the same donor as M14, a cell line that was established from a male with melanoma. Most publications have concluded that MDA-MB-435 is misidentified but the topic has been a controversial one. MDA-MB-435 can express breast-specific markers and its karyotype is XX, which would fit with its reported origin from a female with breast cancer.

      ICLAC went back to the original publications for these two cell lines and found that M14 was established and submitted for publication before MDA-MB-435. The originator, Dr Donald Morton, established a specimen repository at the John Wayne Cancer Institute (JWCI); we contacted JWCI to ask if early specimens were available. JWCI was able to supply early samples of the M14 cell line, a lymphoblastoid cell line from the same donor (ML14), and serum from the melanoma donor dating back to 1973. The originator's work made subsequent testing possible.

      Testing of these early samples showed that MDA-MB-435 came from the M14 donor, proving that MDA-MB-435 is misidentified. The XX karyotype was caused by chromosomal rearrangement; the donor's lymphoblastoid cell line is XY.

      This "Tale of Two Cell Lines" is a cautionary tale showing that phenotype can be misleading when working with cell lines. Always test your cell lines for authenticity. A cell line is itself a variable that can never be taken for granted.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.