Discussion on Quality Control Measures of Instrument Calibration

Abstract Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) data are required in order to have confidence in the results from analytical tests and the equipment used to produce those results. Some AOAC water methods include specific QA/QC procedures, frequencies, and acceptance criteria, but these are considered to be the minimum controls needed to perform a microbiological method successfully. Some regulatory programs, such as those at Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Part 136.7 for chemistry methods, require additional QA/QC measures beyond those listed in the method, which can also apply to microbiological methods. Essential QA/QC measures include sterility checks, reagent specificity and sensitivity checks, assessment of each analyst's capabilities, analysis of blind check samples, and evaluation of the presence of laboratory contamination and instrument calibration and checks. The details of these procedures, their performance frequency, and expected results are set out in this report as they apply to microbiological methods. The specific regulatory requirements of CFR Title 40 Part 136.7 for the Clean Water Act, the laboratory certification requirements of CFR Title 40 Part 141 for the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the International Organization for Standardization 17025 accreditation requirements under The NELAC Institute are also discussed.

Download Full-text

Standardized quality control workflow to evaluate the reproducibility and differentiation potential of human iPSCs into neurons

10.1101/2021.01.13.426620 ◽

2021 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Carol X.-Q. Chen ◽

Narges Abdian ◽

Gilles Maussion ◽

Rhalena A. Thomas ◽

Iveta Demirova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cells ◽

Quality Control ◽

Cortical Neurons ◽

Genomic Stability ◽

Control Measures ◽

List Type ◽

Ipsc Line ◽

Differentiation Potential ◽

Germ Layers ◽

Human Ipscs

AbstractInduced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) derived from human somatic cells have created new opportunities to generate disease-relevant cells. Thus, as the use of patient-derived stem cells has become more widespread, having a workflow to monitor each line is critical. This ensures iPSCs pass a suite of quality control measures, promoting reproducibility across experiments and between labs. With this in mind, we established a four-step workflow to assess our newly generated iPSCs for variations and reproducibility relative to each other and iPSCs obtained from external sources. Our benchmarks for evaluating iPSCs include examining iPSC morphology and proliferation in two different media conditions (mTeSR1 and Essential 8) and evaluating their ability to differentiate into each of the three germ layers, with a particular focus on neurons. Genomic stability in the human iPSCs was analyzed by G-band karyotyping and a qPCR-based stability test, and cell-line identity authenticated by Short Tandem Repeat (STR) analysis. Using standardized dual SMAD inhibition methods, all iPSC lines gave rise to neural progenitors that could subsequently be differentiated into cortical neurons. Neural differentiation was analyzed qualitatively by immunocytochemistry and quantitatively by q-PCR for progenitor, neuronal, cortical and glial markers. Taken together, we present a standardized quality control workflow to evaluate variability and reproducibility across and between iPSCs.HighlightsValidation of culture conditions is critical in the expansion and maintenance of an iPSC line.Characterization of pluripotency and genomic stability ensures each line is free of defects at the DNA level, while maintaining its ability to be directed into any of the three germ layers.Forebrain cortical neurons can be generated from all iPSC line tested; however, the morphology and expression pattern of these neurons can vary from line to line.

Download Full-text