2002Unpublished venueRequires access

Comparison of three dimensional and three step MTT assay and sulforhodamine B assay for tumour chemo sensitivity testing

Y Wang, Yu Cai, B.L. Davidson

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective:To comparethe value of self establishedthree dimensional and three step MTT assay (3D3S MTT assay), MTT assay and Sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay for tumor chemosensitivity testing Methods:Hep G2, T 24 and SKOV3 cell lineswereexposed to Adriamycin and Mitomycin C for 3 days with different further culture durationand then carried out the above three methods For MTT assay and SRB assay the equation to calculate the percentage of tumour growth inhibition (%TGI) is: %TGI=[1 A t /A c ]×100% According to the self establishedmathematical model, the equation for 3D3S MTT assay is: %TGI=1 {\[lnA max ln(A max A t )\]/\[lnA max ln(A max A c )\]} 1/b ×100% Results: S shaped drug response curves were showed in all the above three methods Comparison of the results of %TGIand IC 50 show that %TGIpredicted by MTT assay is lower than that by SRB assay or 3D3S MTT assay, and IC 50 predicted by MTT assay is in average 3 to 5foldsof that by SRB assay or 3D3S MTT assay %TGIand IC 50 predicted by 3D3S MTT assay is approximately the same value as predicted by SRB assay Conclusion:3D3S MTT assay is applicable for in vitro tumor chemosensitivity testing, which is a successful solution to the 3 to 5 foldsunderestimation of chemosensitivity of MTT assay compared with SRB assay

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective:To comparethe value of self establishedthree dimensional and three step MTT assay (3D3S MTT assay), MTT assay and Sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay for tumor chemosensitivity testing Methods:Hep G2, T 24 and SKOV3 cell lineswereexposed to Adriamycin and Mitomycin C for 3 days with different further culture durationand then carried out the above three methods For MTT assay and SRB assay the equation to calculate the percentage of tumour growth inhibition (%TGI) is: %TGI=[1 A t /A c ]×100% According to the self establishedmathematical model, the equation for 3D3S MTT assay is: %TGI=1 {\[lnA max ln(A max A t )\]/\[lnA max ln(A max A c )\]} 1/b ×100% Results: S shaped drug response curves were showed in all the above three methods Comparison of the results of %TGIand IC 50 show that %TGIpredicted by MTT assay is lower than that by SRB assay or 3D3S MTT assay, and IC 50 predicted by MTT assay is in average 3 to 5foldsof that by SRB assay or 3D3S MTT assay %TGIand IC 50 predicted by 3D3S MTT assay is approximately the same value as predicted by SRB assay Conclusion:3D3S MTT assay is applicable for in vitro tumor chemosensitivity testing, which is a successful solution to the 3 to 5 foldsunderestimation of chemosensitivity of MTT assay compared with SRB assay

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective:To comparethe value of self establishedthree dimensional and three step MTT assay (3D3S MTT assay), MTT assay and Sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay for tumor chemosensitivity testing Methods:Hep G2, T 24 and SKOV3 cell lineswereexposed to Adriamycin and Mitomycin C for 3 days with different further culture durationand then carried out the above three methods For MTT assay and SRB assay the equation to calculate the percentage of tumour growth inhibition (%TGI) is: %TGI=[1 A t /A c ]×100% According to the self establishedmathematical model, the equation for 3D3S MTT assay is: %TGI=1 {\[lnA max ln(A max A t )\]/\[lnA max ln(A max A c )\]} 1/b ×100% Results: S shaped drug response curves were showed in all the above three methods Comparison of the results of %TGIand IC 50 show that %TGIpredicted by MTT assay is lower than that by SRB assay or 3D3S MTT assay, and IC 50 predicted by MTT assay is in average 3 to 5foldsof that by SRB assay or 3D3S MTT assay %TGIand IC 50 predicted by 3D3S MTT assay is approximately the same value as predicted by SRB assay Conclusion:3D3S MTT assay is applicable for in vitro tumor chemosensitivity testing, which is a successful solution to the 3 to 5 foldsunderestimation of chemosensitivity of MTT assay compared with SRB assay

Key concepts: MTT assay, Sulforhodamine B, Chemistry, Molecular biology, Cytotoxicity, In vitro, Biology, Biochemistry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of three dimensional and three step MTT assay and sulforhodamine B assay for tumour chemo sensitivity testing — Research Paper | ScholarLens