Cited by 19Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsCancer Genomics and Diagnostics

CeL-ID: cell line identification using RNA-seq data

Open access
Mohammad, Tabrez A., Tsai, Yun S., Ameer, Safwa, Chen, Hung-I Harry, Chiu, Yu-Chiao, Chen, Yidong·2019·BMC Genomics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cell lines form the cornerstone of cell-based experimentation studies into understanding the underlying mechanisms of normal and disease biology including cancer. However, it is commonly acknowledged that contamination of cell lines is a prevalent problem affecting biomedical science and available methods for cell line authentication suffer from limited access as well as being too daunting and time-consuming for many researchers. Therefore, a new and cost effective approach for authentication and quality control of cell lines is needed. RESULTS: We have developed a new RNA-seq based approach named CeL-ID for cell line authentication. CeL-ID uses RNA-seq data to identify variants and compare with variant profiles of other cell lines. RNA-seq data for 934 CCLE cell lines downloaded from NCI GDC were used to generate cell line specific variant profiles and pair-wise correlations were calculated using frequencies and depth of coverage values of all the variants. Comparative analysis of variant profiles revealed that variant profiles differ significantly from cell line to cell line whereas identical, synonymous and derivative cell lines share high variant identity and are highly correlated (ρ > 0.9). Our benchmarking studies revealed that CeL-ID method can identify a cell line with high accuracy and can be a valuable tool of cell line authentication in biomedical science. Finally, CeL-ID estimates the possible cross contamination using linear mixture model if no perfect match was detected. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we show the utility of an RNA-seq based approach for cell line authentication. Our comparative analysis of variant profiles derived from RNA-seq data revealed that variant profiles of each cell line are distinct and overall share low variant identity with other cell lines whereas identical or synonymous cell lines show significantly high variant identity and hence variant profiles can be used as a discriminatory/identifying feature in cell authentication model.

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 · 10.1186/s12864-018-5371-9

Cites

28 of 28 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?

  • RNA-seq expression profiling has been able to correctly identify cell lines and estimate cross-contamination.

    “Expression profiling by RNA-seq has been able to correctly identify cell lines and estimate cross-contamination [127,128].”

    From The history, landscape, and outlook of human cell line authentication and security (2024) · cites this paper as [128]

    The Background reports accurate cell-line identification from RNA-seq data, and the Results section on sample mix-up and contamination estimation reports estimates from simulated mixtures. But the method uses RNA-seq-derived variant profiles and frequencies, not expression profiles; the paper also says contamination-estimation accuracy was not tested on a real mixed dataset. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • STR profiling is the gold standard and authentication standard for cell line authentication.

    “STR profiling remains the gold standard for cell line authentication.”

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

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mohammad, T. A., Tsai, Y. S., Ameer, S., Chen, H.-I. H., Chiu, Y.-C., & Chen, Y.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Yidong
Venue
BMC Genomics
Published
2019-02
Volume
20
Issue
S1
Pages
81-81
ISSN
1471-2164 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2913196556
Cited by
19
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Genomics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (RP160732, RP120685-C2)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA054174, P20CA165589)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR025767)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Keywords
cell line authentication, cell line contamination, somatic mutations, RNA-seq, linear mixing model, cell line identification, quality control
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Cell Line, Humans, Mutation, Models, Statistical, Databases, Factual, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Gene Expression Profiling, Cell Line, Tumor, INDEL Mutation, DNA Barcoding, Taxonomic, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

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