Validation of the human T-lymphocyte cloning assay--ring test report from the EU concerted action on HPRT mutation (EUCAHM)

• Published in: Mutation research Vol. 431; no. 2; p. 211
• Main Authors: Hou, S M, Van Dam, F J, de Zwart, F, Warnock, C, Mognato, M, Turner, J, Podlutskaja, N, Podlutsky, A, Becker, R, Barnett, Y, Barnett, C R, Celotti, L, Davies, M, Hüttner, E, Lambert, B, Tates, A D
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands 17-12-1999
• Subjects: Clone Cells; DNA Mutational Analysis - methods; DNA Mutational Analysis - standards; Genetic Techniques - standards; Humans; Hypoxanthine Phosphoribosyltransferase - genetics; Mutation; Reproducibility of Results; T-Lymphocytes - cytology; T-Lymphocytes - drug effects; T-Lymphocytes - physiology
• ISSN: 0027-5107
• DOI: 10.1016/S0027-5107(99)00164-5

The T-cell cloning assay, which enables the enumeration and molecular analysis of 6-thioguanine resistant (HPRT-negative) mutant T-cells, has been extensively used for studying human somatic gene mutation in vivo. However, large inter-laboratory variations in the HPRT mutant frequency (MF) call for further investigation of inter-laboratory differences in the experimental methodology, and development of an optimal but easy uniform cloning protocol. As part of the EU Concerted Action on HPRT Mutation (EUCAHM), we have carried out two Ring tests for the T-cell cloning assay. For each test, duplicate and coded samples from three buffy coats were distributed to five laboratories for determination of MF using six different protocols. The results indicated a good agreement between split samples within each laboratory. However, both the cloning efficiencies (CEs) and MFs measured for the same blood donors showed substantial inter-laboratory variations. Also, different medium compositions used in one and the same laboratory resulted in a remarkable difference in the level of MF. A uniform operating protocol (UOP) was proposed and compared with the traditional protocols in the second Ring test. The UOP (preincubation) increased the CE in laboratories traditionally using preincubation, but decreased the CE in laboratories traditionally using priming. Adjusted for donor, use of different protocols contributed significantly to the overall variation in lnCE (P = 0.0004) and lnMF (P = 0.03), but there was no significant laboratory effect on the lnCE (P = 0.38) or lnMF (P = 0.14) produced by the UOP alone. Finally, a simplified version of the UOP using the serum-free medium X-Vivo 10 and PMA was tested in one laboratory, and found to produce a considerable increase in CE. This modified UOP needs to be further evaluated in order to be used for future databases on HPRT MFs in various populations.