Summary
HeLa was the first human cell line established (1952) and became one of the most frequently used lines because of its hardiness and rapid growth rate. During the next two decades, the development of other human cell lines mushroomed. One reason for this became apparent during the 1970s, when it was demonstrated that many of these cell lines had been overgrown and replaced by fast-growing HeLa cells inadvertently introduced into the original cultures. Although the discovery of these “HeLa contaminants” prompted immediate alarm, how aware are cell culturists today of the threat of cell line cross-contamination? To answer this question, we performed a literature search and conducted a survey of 483 mammalian cell culturists to determine how many were using HeLa contaminants without being aware of their true identity and how many were not using available means to ensure correct identity. Survey respondents included scientists, staff, and graduate students in 48 countries. HeLa cells were used by 32% and HeLa contaminants by 9% of survey respondents. Most were also using other cell lines; yet, only about a third of respondents were testing their lines for cell identity. Of all the cell lines used, 35% had been obtained from another laboratory instead of from a repository, thus increasing the risk of false identity. Over 220 publications were found in the PubMed database (1969–2004) in which HeLa contaminants were used as a model for the tissue type of the original cell line. Overall, the results of this study indicate a lack of vigilance in cell acquisition and identity testing. Some researchers are still using Hela contaminants without apparent awareness of their true identity. The consequences of cell line cross-contamination can be spurious scientific conclusions; its prevention can save time, resources, and scientific reputations.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Freshney, R. I. Culture of animal cells: a manual of basic technique. New York: Wiley-Liss; 2000.
Gartler, S. M. Apparent HeLa cell contamination of human heteroploid cell lines. Nature 217:750–751; 1968.
Gey, G. O.; Coffman, W. D.; Kubicek, M. T. Tissue culture studies of the proliferative capacity of cervical carcinoma and normal epithelium. Cancer Res. 12:264–265; 1952
Gilbert, D. A.; Reid, Y. A.; Gail, M. H. et al. Application of DNA fingerprints for cell-line individualization. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 47:499–514; 1990.
Jeffreys, A. J.; Wilson, V.; Thein, S. L. Individual-specific ‘fingerprints’ of human DNA. Nature (Lond.) 316:76–79; 1985.
MacLeod, R. A. F.; Dirks, W. G.; Matsuo, Y.; Kaufmann, M.; Milch, H.; Drexler, H. G. Widespread intraspecies cross-contamination of human tumour cell lines. Int. J. Cancer 83:555–563; 1999.
Masters, J. R. HeLa cells 50 years on: the good, the bad and the ugly. Nat. Rev. 2:315–319; 2002.
Masters, J. R.; Palsson, B. Ø., ed. Human cell culture. Vol. 1–3. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic; 1999.
Masters, J. R.; Thomson, J. A.; Daly-Burns, B., et al. Short tandem repeat profiling provides an international reference standard for human cell lines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:8012–8017; 2001.
Nelson-Rees, W. A.; Daniels, D. W.; Flandermeyer, R. R. Cross-contamination of cells in culture. Science 212:446–452; 1981.
Nelson-Rees, W. A.; Flandermeyer, R. A. HeLa cultures defined. Science 191:96–98; 1976.
Nelson-Rees, W. A.; Flandermeyer, R. A.; Hawthorne, P. K. Distinctive banded marker chromosomes of human tumor cell lines. Int. J. Cancer 16:74–82; 1975.
O’Brien, S. J.; Shannon, J.; Gail, M. H. A molecular approach to the identification and individualization of human and animal cells in culture: isozyme and allozyme genetic signatures. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. 16:119–135; 1980.
Stacey, G. N.; Bolton, B. J.; Doyle, A. DNA fingerprinting transforms the art of cell authentication. Nature (Lond.) 357:261–262; 1992.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Buehring, G.C., Eby, E.A. & Eby, M.J. Cell line cross-contamination: How aware are mammalian cell culturists of the problem and how to monitor it?. In Vitro Cell.Dev.Biol.-Animal 40, 211–215 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1290/1543-706X(2004)40<211:CLCHAA>2.0.CO;2
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1290/1543-706X(2004)40<211:CLCHAA>2.0.CO;2