The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cell Proliferation and Cytotoxicity Assays
Open accessAbstract
Cell viability is defined as the number of healthy cells in a sample and proliferation of cells is a vital indicator for understanding the mechanisms in action of certain genes, proteins and pathways involved cell survival or death after exposing to toxic agents. Generally, methods used to determine viability are also common for the detection of cell proliferation. Cell cytotoxicity and proliferation assays are generally used for drug screening to detect whether the test molecules have effects on cell proliferation or display direct cytotoxic effects. Regardless of the type of cell-based assay being used, it is important to know how many viable cells are remaining at the end of the experiment. There are a variety of assay methods based on various cell functions such as enzyme activity, cell membrane permeability, cell adherence, ATP production, co-enzyme production, and nucleotide uptake activity. These methods could be basically classified into different categories: (I) dye exclusion methods such as trypan blue dye exclusion assay, (II) methods based on metabolic activity, (III) ATP assay, (IV) sulforhodamine B assay, (V) protease viability marker assay, (VI) clonogenic cell survival assay, (VII) DNA synthesis cell proliferation assays and (V) raman micro-spectroscopy. In order to choose the optimal viability assay, the cell type, applied culture conditions, and the specific questions being asked should be considered in detail. This particular review aims to provide an overview of common cell proliferation and cytotoxicity assays together with their own advantages and disadvantages, their methodologies, comparisons and intended purposes.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tetrazolium dyes as tools in cell biology: new insights into their cellular reduction
Berridge, M. V., Herst, P. M., & Tan, A. S. (2005) · Biotechnology Annual Review · doi:10.1016/s1387-2656(05)11004-7 · Cited by 2,222
Taupin, P. (2007) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2006.08.002 · Cited by 645
Cited by
Mechanisms of Cellular Senescence: Cell Cycle Arrest and Senescence Associated Secretory Phenotype
Kumari, R., & Jat, P. (2021) · Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · doi:10.3389/fcell.2021.645593 · Cited by 1,622
Aging of the cells: Insight into cellular senescence and detection Methods.
Mohamad Kamal, N. S., Safuan, S., Shamsuddin, S., & Foroozandeh, P. (2020) · European Journal of Cell Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ejcb.2020.151108 · Cited by 287
Organoids in image-based phenotypic chemical screens
Lukonin, I., Zinner, M., & Liberali, P. (2021) · Experimental & Molecular Medicine · doi:10.1038/s12276-021-00641-8 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Adan, A., Kiraz, Y., & Baran, Y.
- Venue
- Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology
- Publisher
- Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
- Published
- 2016-11-11
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 1213-1221
- ISSN
- 1389-2010 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2518046346
- Cited by
- 584
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 28.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cell Proliferation and Cytotoxicity Assays. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2174/1389201017666160808160513
- The paper
- Adan, A., Kiraz, Y., & Baran, Y. (2016). Cell Proliferation and Cytotoxicity Assays. Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.2174/1389201017666160808160513
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.