In vitro

This article is about the type of scientific experiment. For other uses, see In vitro (disambiguation).

Cloned plants in vitro

In vitro (meaning in glass, or in the glass) studies are performed with cells or biological molecules outside their normal biological context. Colloquially called "test-tube experiments", these studies in biology and its subdisciplines are traditionally done in labware such as test tubes, flasks, Petri dishes, and microtiter plates. Studies conducted using components of an organism that have been isolated from their usual biological surroundings permit a more detailed or more convenient analysis than can be done with whole organisms; however, results obtained from in vitro experiments may not fully or accurately predict the effects on a whole organism. In contrast to in vitro experiments, in vivo studies are those conducted in living organisms, including humans, known as clinical trials, and whole plants. ^{[1] [2]}

Definition

In vitro (Latin for "in glass"; often not italicized in English usage ^{[3] [4] [5]} ) studies are conducted using components of an organism that have been isolated from their usual biological surroundings. As the name suggests, in vitro experiments, colloquially "test-tube experiments", are traditionally done in glass labware, using test tubes, flasks, Petri dishes, etc.

The exact scope of in vitro depends on what is considered to be in vitro (experiments done on whole living beings), and in turn what is considered to be a "whole" living being:

• Toxicology and pharmacology mainly concern the effects of a substance on a multi-cellular lifeform, usually an animal. As a result, anything that is not in vivo is in vitro. This includes animal organ cultures, animal tissue cultures ( ex vivo ), animal cell cultures, prokaryotic cell cultures, and isolated biomolecules. ^{[1] [2]}
• The study of pathogens treat the pathogen-in-host state as in vivo. (For example, the in vivo transcriptomics of E. coli during a urinary tract infection.) ^[6] Accordingly, in vitro includes models that do not involve the entire host. ^[7]
  • Viruses, which only replicate in living cells, are studied in the laboratory in cell or tissue culture, and many animal virologists refer to such work as being in vitro to distinguish it from in vivo work in whole animals. ^{[8] [9]}
• The study of the molecular machineries tend to see the whole cell as the biggest unit. As a result, cell cultures (even mammalian ones) can be considered in vivo instead of the usual assignment as in vitro. In this context, in vitro exclusively refers to cell-free systems. ^{[10] [11] [12] [13]}

Examples

As described before, in vitro can encompass work on living and non-living systems of a wide range of complexities.

• Using any part of a living organism
  • Protein purification involves the isolation of a specific protein of interest from a complex mixture of proteins, often obtained from homogenized cells or tissues. ^[14]
• Using parts derived from multicellular organisms (cell culture, tissue culture, ^[15] and more)
  • In vitro fertilization is used to allow spermatozoa to fertilize eggs in a culture dish before implanting the resulting embryo or embryos into the uterus of the prospective mother. ^[16]
  • In vitro diagnostics refers to a wide range of medical and veterinary laboratory tests that are used to diagnose diseases and monitor the clinical status of patients using samples of blood, cells, or other tissues obtained from a patient. ^[17]
  • In vitro phamacological testing has been used to characterize specific adsorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion processes of drugs or general chemicals inside a living organism; for example, Caco-2 cell experiments can be performed to estimate the absorption of compounds through the lining of the gastrointestinal tract; ^[18] The partitioning of the compounds between organs can be determined to study distribution mechanisms; ^[19] Suspension or plated cultures of primary hepatocytes or hepatocyte-like cell lines (Hep G2, HepaRG) can be used to study and quantify metabolism of chemicals. ^[20] These ADME process parameters can then be integrated into so called "physiologically based pharmacokinetic models" or PBPK.
  • Cellular models of neurodegenerative diseases allow different ways to probe the health of the mitochondria in the cell. ^[21]
• Using cellular or subcellular extracts (e.g. wheat germ or reticulocyte extracts)
  • Wheat germ extract contains functional ribosomes. It can be used to translate mRNA outside of a cell. ^[22]
• Using purified membrane-bounded organelles
  • Mitochondria and chloroplasts can be isolated from cells while preserving their function. ^{[23] [24]}
• Using purified macromolecular complexes (such as ribosomes)
  • Functional ribosomes have been assembled in vitro. ^[25]
• Using purified molecules (such as proteins, DNA, or RNA)
  • Polymerase chain reaction is a method for selective replication of specific DNA and RNA sequences in the test tube. It uses pure isolated enzymes. ^[26]
  • The action of DNA replication has been analyzed in vitro on a single-molecule basis. ^[27]

Advantages

In vitro studies permit a species-specific, simpler, more convenient, and more detailed analysis than can be done with the whole organism. Just as studies in whole animals more and more replace human trials, so are in vitro studies replacing studies in whole animals.

Simplicity

Living organisms are extremely complex functional systems that are made up of, at a minimum, many tens of thousands of genes, protein molecules, RNA molecules, small organic compounds, inorganic ions, and complexes in an environment that is spatially organized by membranes, and in the case of multicellular organisms, organ systems. ^{[28] [29]} These myriad components interact with each other and with their environment in a way that processes food, removes waste, moves components to the correct location, and is responsive to signalling molecules, other organisms, light, sound, heat, taste, touch, and balance.

Top view of a Vitrocell mammalian exposure module "smoking robot", (lid removed) view of four separated wells for cell culture inserts to be exposed to tobacco smoke or an aerosol for an in vitro study of the effects

This complexity makes it difficult to identify the interactions between individual components and to explore their basic biological functions. In vitro work simplifies the system under study, so the investigator can focus on a small number of components. ^{[30] [31]}

For example, the identity of proteins of the immune system (e.g. antibodies), and the mechanism by which they recognize and bind to foreign antigens would remain very obscure if not for the extensive use of in vitro work to isolate the proteins, identify the cells and genes that produce them, study the physical properties of their interaction with antigens, and identify how those interactions lead to cellular signals that activate other components of the immune system.

Species specificity

Another advantage of in vitro methods is that human cells can be studied without "extrapolation" from an experimental animal's cellular response. ^{[32] [33] [34]}

Convenience, automation

In vitro methods can be miniaturized and automated, yielding high-throughput screening methods for testing molecules in pharmacology or toxicology. ^[35]

Disadvantages

The primary disadvantage of in vitro experimental studies is that it may be challenging to extrapolate from the results of in vitro work back to the biology of the intact organism. Investigators doing in vitro work must be careful to avoid over-interpretation of their results, which can lead to erroneous conclusions about organismal and systems biology. ^{[15] [36]}

For example, scientists developing a new viral drug to treat an infection with a pathogenic virus (e.g., HIV-1) may find that a candidate drug functions to prevent viral replication in an in vitro setting (typically cell culture). However, before this drug is used in the clinic, it must progress through a series of in vivo trials to determine if it is safe and effective in intact organisms (typically small animals, primates, and humans in succession). Typically, most candidate drugs that are effective in vitro prove to be ineffective in vivo because of issues associated with delivery of the drug to the affected tissues, toxicity towards essential parts of the organism that were not represented in the initial in vitro studies, or other issues. ^[37]

In vitro test batteries

A method which could help decrease animal testing is the use of in vitro batteries, where several in vitro assays are compiled to cover multiple endpoints. Within developmental neurotoxicity and reproductive toxicity there are hopes for test batteries to become easy screening methods for prioritization for which chemicals to be risk assessed and in which order. ^{[38] [39] [40] [41]} Within ecotoxicology in vitro test batteries are already in use for regulatory purpose and for toxicological evaluation of chemicals. ^[42] In vitro tests can also be combined with in vivo testing to make a in vitro in vivo test battery, for example for pharmaceutical testing. ^[43]

In vitro to in vivo extrapolation

Main article: In vitro to in vivo extrapolation

Results obtained from in vitro experiments cannot usually be transposed, as is, to predict the reaction of an entire organism in vivo. Building a consistent and reliable extrapolation procedure from in vitro results to in vivo is therefore extremely important. Solutions include:

• Increasing the complexity of in vitro systems to reproduce tissues and interactions between them (as in "human on chip" systems) ^[44]
• Using mathematical modeling to numerically simulate the behavior of the complex system, where the in vitro data provide model parameter values ^[45]

These two approaches are not incompatible; better in vitro systems provide better data to mathematical models. However, increasingly sophisticated in vitro experiments collect increasingly numerous, complex, and challenging data to integrate. Mathematical models, such as systems biology models, are much needed here. ^[46]

Extrapolating in pharmacology

In pharmacology, IVIVE can be used to approximate pharmacokinetics (PK) or pharmacodynamics (PD). ^[47] Since the timing and intensity of effects on a given target depend on the concentration time course of candidate drug (parent molecule or metabolites) at that target site, in vivo tissue and organ sensitivities can be completely different or even inverse of those observed on cells cultured and exposed in vitro. That indicates that extrapolating effects observed in vitro needs a quantitative model of in vivo PK. Physiologically based PK (PBPK) models are generally accepted to be central to the extrapolations. ^[48]

In the case of early effects or those without intercellular communications, the same cellular exposure concentration is assumed to cause the same effects, both qualitatively and quantitatively, in vitro and in vivo . In these conditions, developing a simple PD model of the dose–response relationship observed in vitro, and transposing it without changes to predict in vivo effects is not enough. ^[49]

See also

• Animal testing
• Ex vivo
• In situ
• In utero
• In vivo
• In silico
• In papyro
• In natura
• Animal in vitro cellular and developmental biology
• Plant in vitro cellular and developmental biology
• In vitro toxicology
• In vitro to in vivo extrapolation
• Slice preparation

References

1. "In vitro methods - ECHA". echa.europa.eu. Retrieved 2023-04-11.
2. Toxicity, National Research Council (US) Subcommittee on Reproductive and Developmental (2001). Experimental Animal and In Vitro Study Designs. National Academies Press (US).
3. Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, archived from the original on 2020-10-10, retrieved 2014-04-20.
4. Iverson, Cheryl; et al., eds. (2007). "12.1.1 Use of Italics". AMA Manual of Style (10th ed.). Oxford, Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-517633-9.
5. American Psychological Association (2010), "4.21 Use of Italics", The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.), Washington, DC, US: APA, ISBN   978-1-4338-0562-2.
6. Bielecki, P; Muthukumarasamy, U; Eckweiler, D; Bielecka, A; Pohl, S; Schanz, A; Niemeyer, U; Oumeraci, T; von Neuhoff, N; Ghigo, JM; Häussler, S (5 August 2014). "In vivo mRNA profiling of uropathogenic Escherichia coli from diverse phylogroups reveals common and group-specific gene expression profiles". mBio. 5 (4): e01075-14. doi:10.1128/mBio.01075-14. PMC   4128348 . PMID   25096872.
7. Brignoli, Tarcisio; Ferrara, Silvia; Bertoni, Giovanni (2024). Emerging In Vitro Models for the Study of Infection and Pathogenesis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Testing of Antibacterial Agents. Methods in Molecular Biology. Vol. 2721. pp. 233–239. doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-3473-8_16. ISBN   978-1-0716-3472-1. PMID   37819526.{{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help)
8. Bruchhagen, Christin; van Krüchten, Andre; Klemm, Carolin; Ludwig, Stephan; Ehrhardt, Christina (2018), Yamauchi, Yohei (ed.), "In Vitro Models to Study Influenza Virus and Staphylococcus aureus Super-Infection on a Molecular Level", Influenza Virus: Methods and Protocols, vol. 1836, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 375–386, doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-8678-1_18, ISBN   978-1-4939-8678-1, PMID   30151583
9. Xie, Xuping; Lokugamage, Kumari G.; Zhang, Xianwen; Vu, Michelle N.; Muruato, Antonio E.; Menachery, Vineet D.; Shi, Pei-Yong (March 2021). "Engineering SARS-CoV-2 using a reverse genetic system". Nature Protocols. 16 (3): 1761–1784. doi:10.1038/s41596-021-00491-8. ISSN   1750-2799. PMC   8168523 . PMID   33514944.
10. Watson, JF; García-Nafría, J (18 October 2019). "In vivo DNA assembly using common laboratory bacteria: A re-emerging tool to simplify molecular cloning". The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 294 (42): 15271–15281. doi: 10.1074/jbc.REV119.009109 . PMC   6802500 . PMID   31522138.
11. Zhou, Xiaojuan; Zhang, Niubing; Gong, Jie; Zhang, Kaixiang; Chen, Ping; Cheng, Xiang; Ye, Bang-Ce; Zhao, Guoping; Jing, Xinyun; Li, Xuan (14 November 2024). "In vivo assembly of complete eukaryotic nucleosomes and (H3-H4)-only non-canonical nucleosomal particles in the model bacterium Escherichia coli". Communications Biology. 7 (1): 1510. doi:10.1038/s42003-024-07211-4. PMC   11564532 . PMID   39543208.
12. Dettmer, Ulf; Newman, Andrew J.; Luth, Eric S.; Bartels, Tim; Selkoe, Dennis (March 2013). "In Vivo Cross-linking Reveals Principally Oligomeric Forms of α-Synuclein and β-Synuclein in Neurons and Non-neural Cells". Journal of Biological Chemistry. 288 (9): 6371–6385. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.403311 . PMC   3585072 . PMID   23319586.
13. Minde DP, Ramakrishna M, Lilley KS (2020). "Biotin proximity tagging favours unfolded proteins and enables the study of intrinsically disordered regions". Communications Biology. 3 (1): 38. bioRxiv   10.1101/274761 . doi: 10.1038/s42003-020-0758-y . PMC   6976632 . PMID   31969649.
14. Labrou, Nikolaos E. (2014), Labrou, Nikolaos E. (ed.), "Protein Purification: An Overview", Protein Downstream Processing: Design, Development and Application of High and Low-Resolution Methods, Methods in Molecular Biology, vol. 1129, Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, pp. 3–10, doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-977-2_1, ISBN   978-1-62703-977-2, PMID   24648062
15. Spielmann, Horst; Goldberg, Alan M. (1999-01-01), Marquardt, Hans; Schäfer, Siegfried G.; McClellan, Roger; Welsch, Frank (eds.), "Chapter 49 - In Vitro Methods" , Toxicology, San Diego: Academic Pressy, pp. 1131–1138, doi:10.1016/b978-012473270-4/50108-5, ISBN   978-0-12-473270-4 , retrieved 2023-04-11
16. Johnson, M. H. (2013-01-01), "In Vitro Fertilization" , in Maloy, Stanley; Hughes, Kelly (eds.), Brenner's Encyclopedia of Genetics (Second Edition), San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 44–45, doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-374984-0.00777-4, ISBN   978-0-08-096156-9 , retrieved 2023-04-11
17. "In vitro diagnostics - Global". www.who.int. Retrieved 2023-04-11.
18. Artursson P.; Palm K.; Luthman K. (2001). "Caco-2 monolayers in experimental and theoretical predictions of drug transport". Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 46 (1–3): 27–43. doi:10.1016/s0169-409x(00)00128-9. PMID   11259831.
19. Gargas M.L.; Burgess R.L.; Voisard D.E.; Cason G.H.; Andersen M.E. (1989). "Partition-Coefficients of low-molecular-weight volatile chemicals in various liquids and tissues". Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. 98 (1): 87–99. Bibcode:1989ToxAP..98...87G. doi:10.1016/0041-008x(89)90137-3. PMID   2929023. S2CID   6928235.
20. Pelkonen O.; Turpeinen M. (2007). "In vitro-in vivo extrapolation of hepatic clearance: biological tools, scaling factors, model assumptions and correct concentrations". Xenobiotica. 37 (10–11): 1066–1089. doi:10.1080/00498250701620726. PMID   17968737. S2CID   3043750.
21. Connolly, Niamh M. C.; Theurey, Pierre; Adam-Vizi, Vera; Bazan, Nicolas G.; Bernardi, Paolo; Bolaños, Juan P.; Culmsee, Carsten; Dawson, Valina L.; Deshmukh, Mohanish; Duchen, Michael R.; Düssmann, Heiko; Fiskum, Gary; Galindo, Maria F.; Hardingham, Giles E.; Hardwick, J. Marie (March 2018). "Guidelines on experimental methods to assess mitochondrial dysfunction in cellular models of neurodegenerative diseases". Cell Death & Differentiation. 25 (3): 542–572. doi:10.1038/s41418-017-0020-4. ISSN   1476-5403. PMC   5864235 . PMID   29229998.
22. Harbers, M (25 August 2014). "Wheat germ systems for cell-free protein expression". FEBS Letters. 588 (17): 2762–73. Bibcode:2014FEBSL.588.2762H. doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2014.05.061. PMID   24931374.
23. Rozsivalova, DH; Popovic, M; Kaul, H; Trifunovic, A (2023). Isolation of Functional Mitochondria and Pure mtDNA from Murine Tissues. Methods in Molecular Biology (Clifton, N.J.). Vol. 2615. pp. 3–16. doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-2922-2_1. ISBN   978-1-0716-2921-5. PMID   36807780.
24. Kobza, John; Moore, Brandon D.; Seemann, Jeffrey R. (January 1989). "Isolation of photosynthetically active protoplasts and intact chloroplasts from Phaseolus vulgaris". Plant Science. 65 (2): 177–182. Bibcode:1989PlnSc..65..177K. doi:10.1016/0168-9452(89)90063-0.
25. Hammerling, Michael J.; Fritz, Brian R.; Yoesep, Danielle J.; Kim, Do Soon; Carlson, Erik D.; Jewett, Michael C. (2020-02-28). "In vitro ribosome synthesis and evolution through ribosome display". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 1108. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.1108H. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14705-2. ISSN   2041-1723. PMC   7048773 . PMID   32111839.
26. "Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (article)". Khan Academy. Retrieved 2023-04-11.
27. Bocanegra, Rebeca; Ismael Plaza, G. A.; Pulido, Carlos R.; Ibarra, Borja (2021-01-01). "DNA replication machinery: Insights from in vitro single-molecule approaches". Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal. 19: 2057–2069. doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.04.013. ISSN   2001-0370. PMC   8085672 . PMID   33995902.
28. Alberts, Bruce (2008). Molecular biology of the cell. New York: Garland Science. ISBN   978-0-8153-4105-5.
29. "Biological Complexity and Integrative Levels of Organization | Learn Science at Scitable". www.nature.com. Retrieved 2023-04-11.
30. Vignais, Paulette M.; Pierre Vignais (2010). Discovering Life, Manufacturing Life: How the experimental method shaped life sciences. Berlin: Springer. ISBN   978-90-481-3766-4.
31. Jacqueline Nairn; Price, Nicholas C. (2009). Exploring proteins: a student's guide to experimental skills and methods. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-920570-7.
32. "Existing Non-animal Alternatives". AltTox.org. 20 November 2016. Archived from the original on March 13, 2020.
33. Pound, Pandora; Ritskes-Hoitinga, Merel (2018-11-07). "Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail". Journal of Translational Medicine. 16 (1): 304. doi: 10.1186/s12967-018-1678-1 . ISSN   1479-5876. PMC   6223056 . PMID   30404629.
34. Zeiss, Caroline J. (December 2021). "Comparative Milestones in Rodent and Human Postnatal Central Nervous System Development" . Toxicologic Pathology. 49 (8): 1368–1373. doi:10.1177/01926233211046933. ISSN   0192-6233. PMID   34569375. S2CID   237944066.
35. Quignot N.; Hamon J.; Bois F. (2014). Extrapolating in vitro results to predict human toxicity, in In Vitro Toxicology Systems, Bal-Price A., Jennings P., Eds, Methods in Pharmacology and Toxicology series. New York, US: Springer Science. pp. 531–550.
36. Rothman, S. S. (2002). Lessons from the living cell: the culture of science and the limits of reductionism. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN   0-07-137820-0.
37. De Clercq E (October 2005). "Recent highlights in the development of new antiviral drugs". Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 8 (5): 552–60. doi:10.1016/j.mib.2005.08.010. PMC   7108330 . PMID   16125443.
38. Blum, Jonathan; Masjosthusmann, Stefan; Bartmann, Kristina; Bendt, Farina; Dolde, Xenia; Dönmez, Arif; Förster, Nils; Holzer, Anna-Katharina; Hübenthal, Ulrike; Keßel, Hagen Eike; Kilic, Sadiye; Klose, Jördis; Pahl, Melanie; Stürzl, Lynn-Christin; Mangas, Iris (2023-01-01). "Establishment of a human cell-based in vitro battery to assess developmental neurotoxicity hazard of chemicals". Chemosphere. 311 (Pt 2) 137035. Bibcode:2023Chmsp.31137035B. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.137035 . ISSN   0045-6535. PMID   36328314.
39. OECD (2023-04-14). "OECD work on in vitro assays for developmental neurotoxicity" . Retrieved 2023-07-04.
40. Piersma, A. H.; Bosgra, S.; van Duursen, M. B. M.; Hermsen, S. A. B.; Jonker, L. R. A.; Kroese, E. D.; van der Linden, S. C.; Man, H.; Roelofs, M. J. E.; Schulpen, S. H. W.; Schwarz, M.; Uibel, F.; van Vugt-Lussenburg, B. M. A.; Westerhout, J.; Wolterbeek, A. P. M. (2013-07-01). "Evaluation of an alternative in vitro test battery for detecting reproductive toxicants" . Reproductive Toxicology. 38: 53–64. Bibcode:2013RepTx..38...53P. doi:10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.03.002. ISSN   0890-6238. PMID   23511061.
41. Martin, Melissa M.; Baker, Nancy C.; Boyes, William K.; Carstens, Kelly E.; Culbreth, Megan E.; Gilbert, Mary E.; Harrill, Joshua A.; Nyffeler, Johanna; Padilla, Stephanie; Friedman, Katie Paul; Shafer, Timothy J. (2022-09-01). "An expert-driven literature review of "negative" chemicals for developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) in vitro assay evaluation". Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 93 107117. Bibcode:2022NTxT...9307117M. doi:10.1016/j.ntt.2022.107117. ISSN   0892-0362. OSTI   1981723. PMC   12006915 . PMID   35908584. S2CID   251187782.
42. Repetto, Guillermo (2013), "Test Batteries in Ecotoxicology", in Férard, Jean-François; Blaise, Christian (eds.), Encyclopedia of Aquatic Ecotoxicology, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 1105–1128, doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5704-2_100, ISBN   978-94-007-5704-2
43. European Medicines Agency (EMA) (2013-02-11). "ICH S2 (R1) Genotoxicity testing and data interpretation for pharmaceuticals intended for human use - Scientific guideline" (PDF). European Medicines Agency - Science Medicines Health.
44. Sung, JH; Esch, MB; Shuler, ML (2010). "Integration of in silico and in vitro platforms for pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling". Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism & Toxicology. 6 (9): 1063–1081. doi:10.1517/17425255.2010.496251. PMID   20540627. S2CID   30583735.
45. Quignot, Nadia; Bois, Frédéric Yves (2013). "A computational model to predict rat ovarian steroid secretion from in vitro experiments with endocrine disruptors". PLOS ONE. 8 (1) e53891. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...853891Q. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053891 . PMC   3543310 . PMID   23326527.
46. Proença, Susana; Escher, Beate I.; Fischer, Fabian C.; Fisher, Ciarán; Grégoire, Sébastien; Hewitt, Nicky J.; Nicol, Beate; Paini, Alicia; Kramer, Nynke I. (2021-06-01). "Effective exposure of chemicals in in vitro cell systems: A review of chemical distribution models". Toxicology in Vitro. 73 105133. Bibcode:2021ToxVi..7305133P. doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2021.105133 . ISSN   0887-2333. PMID   33662518. S2CID   232122825.
47. Yadav, Jaydeep (2021). "Recent developments in in vitro and in vivo models for improved translation of preclinical pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics data". Drug Metab Rev. 53 (2): 207–233. doi:10.1080/03602532.2021.1922435. PMC   8381685 . PMID   33989099.
48. Yoon M, Campbell JL, Andersen ME, Clewell HJ (2012). "Quantitative in vitro to in vivo extrapolation of cell-based toxicity assay results". Critical Reviews in Toxicology. 42 (8): 633–652. doi:10.3109/10408444.2012.692115. PMID   22667820. S2CID   3083574.
49. Louisse J, de Jong E, van de Sandt JJ, Blaauboer BJ, Woutersen RA, Piersma AH, Rietjens IM, Verwei M (2010). "The use of in vitro toxicity data and physiologically based kinetic modeling to predict dose–response curves for in vivo developmental toxicity of glycol ethers in rat and man". Toxicological Sciences. 118 (2): 470–484. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfq270 . PMID   20833708.

External links

• Media related to In vitro at Wikimedia Commons