Department of Genetics and Pharmacology, Institute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Department of Internal Medicine II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
J Lipid Res. 2021;62:100125. doi: 10.1016/j.jlr.2021.100125. Epub 2021 Sep 25.
HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC) may protect against cardiovascular disease. However, CEC assays are not standardized, hampering their application in large cohorts and comparison between studies. To improve standardization, we systematically investigated technical differences between existing protocols that influence assay performance that have not been previously addressed. CEC was measured in 96-well plates using J774A.1 macrophages labeled with BODIPY-cholesterol and incubated for 4 h with 2% apolipoprotein B-depleted human serum. The time zero method, which calculates CEC using control wells, and the per-well method, which calculates CEC based on the actual content of BODIPY-cholesterol in each well, were compared in 506 samples. We showed that the per-well method had a considerably lower sample rejection rate (4.74% vs. 13.44%) and intra-assay (4.48% vs. 5.28%) and interassay coefficients of variation (two controls: 7.85%, 9.86% vs. 13.58%, 15.29%) compared with the time zero method. Correction for plate-to-plate differences using four controls on each plate also improved assay performance of both methods. In addition, we observed that the lysis reagent used had a significant effect. Compared with cholic acid, lysis with sodium hydroxide results in higher (P = 0.0082) and Triton X-100 in lower (P = 0.0028) CEC values. Furthermore, large cell seeding errors (30% variation) greatly biased CEC for both referencing methods (P < 0.0001) as measured by a resazurin assay. In conclusion, lysis reagents, cell numbers, and assay setup greatly impact the quality and reliability of CEC quantification and should be considered when this method is newly established in a laboratory.
高密度脂蛋白介导的胆固醇外排能力(CEC)可能有助于预防心血管疾病。然而,CEC 检测方法尚未标准化,这阻碍了它们在大样本量队列中的应用以及不同研究之间的比较。为了提高标准化程度,我们系统地研究了现有方案之间的技术差异,这些差异会影响检测性能,但以前并未得到解决。我们使用 J774A.1 巨噬细胞在 96 孔板上进行 CEC 测量,这些巨噬细胞用 BODIPY-胆固醇标记,并与 2%载脂蛋白 B 耗尽的人血清孵育 4 小时。我们比较了使用对照孔计算 CEC 的时间零法和基于每个孔中 BODIPY-胆固醇实际含量计算 CEC 的每孔法,这两种方法在 506 个样本中进行了比较。结果显示,与时间零法相比,每孔法的样本拒收率(4.74% vs. 13.44%)、批内(4.48% vs. 5.28%)和批间(两个对照孔:7.85%,9.86% vs. 13.58%,15.29%)变异系数均明显更低。在每个平板上使用 4 个对照平板还可以改善两种方法的检测性能。此外,我们还观察到,所用的裂解试剂具有显著影响。与胆酸钠相比,氢氧化钠裂解导致 CEC 值更高(P = 0.0082),而 Triton X-100 裂解导致 CEC 值更低(P = 0.0028)。此外,细胞接种误差较大(30%变化)会极大地影响两种参照方法的 CEC 值(P < 0.0001),这是通过 Resazurin 检测法得出的结果。总之,裂解试剂、细胞数量和检测设置极大地影响 CEC 定量的质量和可靠性,在实验室新建立该方法时应予以考虑。