Chemical Concentrations in Cell Culture Compartments (C5) – Concentration Definitions

Jaffar Kisitu, Susanne Hougaard Bennekou, Marcel Leist*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

220 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Some laboratory issues are taken for granted as they seem to be simple and not worth much thought. This applies to “concentrations of a chemical tested for bioactivity/toxicity”. Can there be any issue about weighing a compound, diluting it in culture medium and calculating the final mass (or particle number)-to-volume ratio? We discuss here some basic concepts about concentrations and their units, addressing also differences between “dose” and “concentration”. The problem of calculated nominal concentrations not necessarily corresponding to local concentrations (relevant for biological effects of a chemical) is highlighted. We present and exemplify different concentration measures, for instance those relying on weight, volume, or particle number of the test compound in a given volume; we also include normalizations to the mass, protein content, or cell number of the reference system. Interconversion is discussed as a major, often unresolved, issue. We put this into the context of the overall objective of defining concentrations, i.e., the determination of threshold values of bioactivity (e.g., an EC50). As standard approach for data display, the negative decadic logarithm of the molar concentrations (–log(M)) is recommended here, but arguments are also presented for exceptions from such a rule. These basic definitions are meant as a foundation for follow-up articles that examine the concepts of nominal, free, and intracellular concentrations to provide guidance on how to relate in vitro concentrations to in vivo doses by in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) in order to advance the use of new approach methods (NAM) in regulatory decision making.
Original languageEnglish
JournalA L T E X. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation
Volume36
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)154-160
ISSN1868-596X
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Cite this

@article{41f21d45d65848cfa37f7cab0f6af9aa,
title = "Chemical Concentrations in Cell Culture Compartments (C5) – Concentration Definitions",
abstract = "Some laboratory issues are taken for granted as they seem to be simple and not worth much thought. This applies to “concentrations of a chemical tested for bioactivity/toxicity”. Can there be any issue about weighing a compound, diluting it in culture medium and calculating the final mass (or particle number)-to-volume ratio? We discuss here some basic concepts about concentrations and their units, addressing also differences between “dose” and “concentration”. The problem of calculated nominal concentrations not necessarily corresponding to local concentrations (relevant for biological effects of a chemical) is highlighted. We present and exemplify different concentration measures, for instance those relying on weight, volume, or particle number of the test compound in a given volume; we also include normalizations to the mass, protein content, or cell number of the reference system. Interconversion is discussed as a major, often unresolved, issue. We put this into the context of the overall objective of defining concentrations, i.e., the determination of threshold values of bioactivity (e.g., an EC50). As standard approach for data display, the negative decadic logarithm of the molar concentrations (–log(M)) is recommended here, but arguments are also presented for exceptions from such a rule. These basic definitions are meant as a foundation for follow-up articles that examine the concepts of nominal, free, and intracellular concentrations to provide guidance on how to relate in vitro concentrations to in vivo doses by in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) in order to advance the use of new approach methods (NAM) in regulatory decision making.",
author = "Jaffar Kisitu and Bennekou, {Susanne Hougaard} and Marcel Leist",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.14573/altex.1901031",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "154--160",
journal = "A L T E X. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation",
issn = "1868-596X",
publisher = "Springer Spektrum",
number = "1",

}

Chemical Concentrations in Cell Culture Compartments (C5) – Concentration Definitions. / Kisitu, Jaffar; Bennekou, Susanne Hougaard; Leist, Marcel.

In: A L T E X. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2019, p. 154-160.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Chemical Concentrations in Cell Culture Compartments (C5) – Concentration Definitions

AU - Kisitu, Jaffar

AU - Bennekou, Susanne Hougaard

AU - Leist, Marcel

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Some laboratory issues are taken for granted as they seem to be simple and not worth much thought. This applies to “concentrations of a chemical tested for bioactivity/toxicity”. Can there be any issue about weighing a compound, diluting it in culture medium and calculating the final mass (or particle number)-to-volume ratio? We discuss here some basic concepts about concentrations and their units, addressing also differences between “dose” and “concentration”. The problem of calculated nominal concentrations not necessarily corresponding to local concentrations (relevant for biological effects of a chemical) is highlighted. We present and exemplify different concentration measures, for instance those relying on weight, volume, or particle number of the test compound in a given volume; we also include normalizations to the mass, protein content, or cell number of the reference system. Interconversion is discussed as a major, often unresolved, issue. We put this into the context of the overall objective of defining concentrations, i.e., the determination of threshold values of bioactivity (e.g., an EC50). As standard approach for data display, the negative decadic logarithm of the molar concentrations (–log(M)) is recommended here, but arguments are also presented for exceptions from such a rule. These basic definitions are meant as a foundation for follow-up articles that examine the concepts of nominal, free, and intracellular concentrations to provide guidance on how to relate in vitro concentrations to in vivo doses by in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) in order to advance the use of new approach methods (NAM) in regulatory decision making.

AB - Some laboratory issues are taken for granted as they seem to be simple and not worth much thought. This applies to “concentrations of a chemical tested for bioactivity/toxicity”. Can there be any issue about weighing a compound, diluting it in culture medium and calculating the final mass (or particle number)-to-volume ratio? We discuss here some basic concepts about concentrations and their units, addressing also differences between “dose” and “concentration”. The problem of calculated nominal concentrations not necessarily corresponding to local concentrations (relevant for biological effects of a chemical) is highlighted. We present and exemplify different concentration measures, for instance those relying on weight, volume, or particle number of the test compound in a given volume; we also include normalizations to the mass, protein content, or cell number of the reference system. Interconversion is discussed as a major, often unresolved, issue. We put this into the context of the overall objective of defining concentrations, i.e., the determination of threshold values of bioactivity (e.g., an EC50). As standard approach for data display, the negative decadic logarithm of the molar concentrations (–log(M)) is recommended here, but arguments are also presented for exceptions from such a rule. These basic definitions are meant as a foundation for follow-up articles that examine the concepts of nominal, free, and intracellular concentrations to provide guidance on how to relate in vitro concentrations to in vivo doses by in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) in order to advance the use of new approach methods (NAM) in regulatory decision making.

U2 - 10.14573/altex.1901031

DO - 10.14573/altex.1901031

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30633307

VL - 36

SP - 154

EP - 160

JO - A L T E X. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation

JF - A L T E X. Alternatives to Animal Experimentation

SN - 1868-596X

IS - 1

ER -