Cited by 35Microbial infections and disease researchScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

World Health Organization International Standard To Harmonize Assays for Detection of Mycoplasma DNA

Open access
Nübling, C. Micha, Baylis, Sally A., Hanschmann, Kay-Martin, Montag-Lessing, Thomas, Chudy, Michael, Kreß, Julia, Ulrych, Ursula, Czurda, Stefan +2 more·2015·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Nucleic acid amplification technique (NAT)-based assays (referred to here as NAT assays) are increasingly used as an alternative to culture-based approaches for the detection of mycoplasma contamination of cell cultures. Assay features, like the limit of detection or quantification, vary widely between different mycoplasma NAT assays. Biological reference materials may be useful for harmonization of mycoplasma NAT assays. An international feasibility study included lyophilized preparations of four distantly related mycoplasma species ( Acholeplasma laidlawii , Mycoplasma fermentans , M. orale , M. pneumoniae ) at different concentrations which were analyzed by 21 laboratories using 26 NAT assays with a qualitative, semiquantitative, or quantitative design. An M. fermentans preparation was shown to decrease the interassay variation when used as a common reference material. The preparation was remanufactured and characterized in a comparability study, and its potency (in NAT-detectable units) across different NATs was determined. The World Health Organization (WHO) Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) established this preparation to be the “1st World Health Organization international standard for mycoplasma DNA for nucleic acid amplification technique-based assays designed for generic mycoplasma detection” (WHO Tech Rep Ser 987:42, 2014) with a potency of 200,000 IU/ml. This WHO international standard is now available as a reference preparation for characterization of NAT assays, e.g., for determination of analytic sensitivity, for calibration of quantitative assays in a common unitage, and for defining regulatory requirements in the field of mycoplasma testing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aem.01150-15

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • PCR-based technique has emerged as the method of choice for fast and reliable detection of mycoplasma.

    “These prolonged tests have been largely replaced by a PCR-based technique that has emerged as the method of choice for fast and reliable detection of mycoplasma (Nübling et al., 2015).”

    From In Vitro research Reproducibility: Keeping up High Standards (2019) · cites this paper as Nübling et al., 2015

    The Abstract (page unavailable) says culture-based tests can take up to 28 days and that suitably validated nucleic acid amplification assays are increasingly used as alternatives. The Mycoplasma NAT assays section (page unavailable) says the assays studied were nearly all real-time PCR. The paper does not establish that PCR has largely replaced traditional tests or become the method of choice; it also makes reliability conditional on validation. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Armstrong SE, Mariano JA, Lundin DJ. 2010. The scope of mycoplasma contamination within the biopharmaceutical industry. Biologicals 38: 211-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2010.03.002. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Laborde S, Degrave A, Lehmann D, Jouette S, Rofel C, Muller T, Hertzog N, Rook M, Ribault S. 2010. Detection of Mollicutes in biore- actor samples by real-time transcription-mediated amplification. Lett Appl Microbiol 50:633-638. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-765X.2010 .02846.x. · DOI
  3. Knezevic I, Stacey G, Petricciani J, Sheets R. 2010. Evaluation of cell substrates for the production of biologicals: revision of WHO recommen- dations. Report of the WHO Study Group on Cell Substrates for the Pro- duction of Biologicals, 22-23 April 2009, Bethesda, USA. Biologicals 38: 162-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.08.019. · DOI
  4. Janetzko K, Rink G, Hecker A, Bieback K, Klüter H, Bugert P. 2014. A single-tube real-time PCR assay for Mycoplasma detection as a routine quality control of cell therapeutics. Transfus Med Hemother 41:83-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000357096. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Peredeltchouk M, David SA, Bhattacharya B, Volokhov DV, Chizhikov V. 2011. Detection of mycoplasma contamination in cell substrates using reverse transcription-PCR assays. J Appl Microbiol 110:54 -60. http://dx .doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04853.x. · DOI
  6. Pinheiro de Oliveira TF, Fonseca AA, Camargos MF, de Oliveira AM, Pinto Cottorello AC, Souza Ados R, de Almeida IG, Heinemann MB. 2013. Detection of contaminants in cell cultures, sera and trypsin. Biolog- icals 41:407-414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2013.08.005. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Shahhosseiny MH, Hosseiny Z, HR Khoramkhorshid HR, Azari S, Shokrgozar MA. 2010. Rapid and sensitive detection of Mollicutes in cell culture by polymerase chain reaction. J Basic Microbiol 50:171-178. http: //dx.doi.org/10.1002/jobm.200800174. · DOI
  8. Störmer M, Vollmer T, Henrich B, Kleesiek K, Dreier J. 2009. Broad- range real-time PCR assay for the rapid identification of cell-line contam- inants and clinically important mollicute species. Int J Med Microbiol 299:291-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmm.2008.08.002. · DOI
  9. Volokhov DV, Graham LJ, Brorson KA, Chizhikov VE. 2011. Myco- plasma testing of cell substrates and biologics: review of alternative non- microbiological techniques. Mol Cell Probes 25:69 -77. http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.mcp.2011.01.002. · DOI
  10. Eldering JA, Felten C, Veilleux CA, Potts BJ. 2004. Development of a PCR method for mycoplasma testing of Chinese hamster ovary cell cul- tures used in the manufacture of recombinant therapeutic proteins. Bio- logicals 32:183-193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2004.08.005. · DOI
  11. Deutschmann SM, Kavermann H, Knack Y. 2010. Validation of a NAT- based Mycoplasma assay according European Pharmacopoiea. Biologicals 38:238 -248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.11.004. · DOI
  12. Vanni I, Ugolotti E, Raso A, Di Marco E, Melioli G, Biassoni R. 2012. Development and validation of a multiplex quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay for the detection of Mollicutes impurities in human cells, cultured under good manufacturing practice conditions, and following European Pharmacopoeia requirements and the International Confer- ence on Harmonization guidelines. Cytotherapy 14:752-766. http://dx .doi.org/10.3109/14653249.2012.671517. · DOI
  13. Zhi Y, Mayhew A, Seng N, Takle GB. 2010. Validation of a PCR method for the detection of mycoplasmas according to European Pharmacopoeia section 2.6.7. Biologicals 38:232-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.11 .003. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Asarnow D, Warford A, Fernandez L, Hom J, Sandhu G, Candichoy Z, Luna G, Goldman M, Rarich R. 2010. Validation and international regulatory experience for a mycoplasma touchdown PCR assay. Biologi- cals 38:224 -231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.11.006. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Dabrazhynetskaya A, Volokhov DV, Lin TL, Beck B, Gupta RK, Chi- zhikov V. 2013. Collaborative study report: evaluation of the ATCC ex- perimental mycoplasma reference strains panel prepared for comparison of NAT-based and conventional mycoplasma detection methods. Biolog- icals 41:377-383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2013.07.002. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nübling, C. M., Baylis, S. A., Hanschmann, K.-M., Montag-Lessing, T., Chudy, M., Kreß, J., Ulrych, U., Czurda, S., Rosengarten, R., & the Mycoplasma Collaborative Study Group
Affiliations
  • Paul Ehrlich Institut (DE)
  • Mycosafe Diagnostics GmbH, Vienna, Austria
  • University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna (AT)
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2015-09
Volume
81
Issue
17
Pages
5694-5702
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2126387695
Cited by
35
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3
FWCI
2.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied and Environmental Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Sanofi
  • Sanofi Pasteur
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Microbial infections and disease research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Keywords
mycoplasma detection, nucleic acid amplification tests, assay harmonization, biological reference materials, WHO International Standard, Acholeplasma laidlawii, Mycoplasma fermentans, Mycoplasma orale, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, assay calibration, regulatory requirements
MeSH terms
DNA, Bacterial, Laboratories, Mycoplasma, World Health Organization, Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review