These assays are used to test cytotoxicity and cytostatic activity
Both are good, I have compared results from both and they are similar. I prefer AlamarBlue or PrestoBlue, because you just add it to the medium, wait, and read the plate. It is not toxic and you can perform time curse experiments in the same plate, or post-measurement functional assays.
Hello Srivatsava. I've used the MTT assay with cancer cells and it was very quick, easy and repeatable however the article below mentions the almar blue may be a bit more sensitive. I would go with the one that has been used with the cells you are testing or the one more commonly used in the journal you may be publishing your work.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887233304000633)
Dear Srivatsava,
MTT is a good assay to test cytotoxicity or cytostatic activity if you mean a cell cycle arrest and maybe further apoptosis.MTT is usually refered for proliferation which i believe may not be specific in terms of proliferation measurements in cells but yes to study cytotoxicity its a good option,
You can also use XTT (2,3-Bis-(2-Methoxy-4-Nitro-5-Sulfophenyl)-2H-Tetrazolium-5-Carboxanilide) which is considered more sensitive than MTT.
regards
MTT is used a lot more in the literature than the Alamar Blue test. i use MTT for testing paclitaxel IC50s on breast cancer cells and the results are fast, accurate and very easy to replicate. you're best option is to look at previous papers that have done similar experiments to yours and use the test they use (usually MTT)
I prefer doing MTT fof test cytotocxicity ability; Its easy, and cheap. Beside that you can do WST-1.
Both are good, I have compared results from both and they are similar. I prefer AlamarBlue or PrestoBlue, because you just add it to the medium, wait, and read the plate. It is not toxic and you can perform time curse experiments in the same plate, or post-measurement functional assays.
Both are similar really, neither really measure cytotoxicity per se, but provide an index of metabolic activity, which should, in principle, correlate with the number of viable cells. With that in mind, agents that affect metabolic activity can be confounders.
MTT is a colorimetric assay where an indicator is reduced by live cells. Traditional MTT is a two step assay, there are now some derivatives that are 1 step.
AlamarBlue (Resazurin) based assays are fluorimetric and also rely on an indicator being reduced via living cells. These are 1 step, add to media, incubate, read.
Depending on what you're doing you may consider using LDH, which is more of a true cytotoxicity assay. In live cells LDH is compartmentalized inside the cell, while dead cells will be leaky and result in LDH release.
I also prefer Alamar Blue method, because of its simplicity and the fact that it is not so toxic for cells as MTT and it has an advantage if you want to do the microscopic documentation afterwards. After MTT assay cells are usually damaged.
MTT assay will measure the Percentage of surviving cells in your experiment. MTT values are not a direct measurement of cell growth or cell death. Also, MTT is inaccurate when you have v.low or v. high cell number/well. But, MTT is a good start. Its good to use other assays to confirm. Fro e.g., If cell death is suspected-you can do different types of apoptosis assays. If cell proliferation is affected, then, A. Blue assay is good. If you want to look for delayed effects on cell growth, then colony forming assay is the gold standard. The attached pdf talks of pros-cons of different assays. Hope it helps!
- Badges
- Science topic