Development of the <i>ISBER Best Practices for Repositories: Collection, Storage, Retrieval and Distribution of Biological Materials for Research</i>

Campbell, Lori; Betsou, Fay; Garcia, Debra Leiolani; Giri, Judith; Pitt, K; Pugh, Rebecca S.; Sexton, Katherine C.; Skubitz, Amy P.N.; Somiari, Stella

doi:10.1089/bio.2012.1025

Cited by 85 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This need for harmonization and standardization led to the establishment of the Best Practices for Repositories by the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER). 4 While biorepositories evolved from activities within clinics or pathology laboratories into professional institutes, the need to maintain appropriate levels of sample quality also grew. Quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) schemes were designed 5 and are now embedded in the routine procedures of many biobanks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fit for Purpose Frozen Tissue Collections by RNA Integrity Number-Based Quality Control Assurance at the Erasmus MC Tissue Bank

Kap

Oomen

Arshad

et al. 2014

Biopreservation and Biobanking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

About 5000 frozen tissue samples are collected each year by the Erasmus Medical Center tissue bank. Two percent of these samples are randomly selected annually for RNA isolation and RNA Integrity Number (RIN) measurement. A similar quality assessment was conducted during centralization of a 20-year-old tissue collection from the cancer institute, a 15-year-old liver sample archive (-80°C), and a 13-year-old clinical pathology frozen biopsy archive (Liquid Nitrogen). Samples were divided into either high-quality (RIN ≥6.5) or low-quality overall categories, or into four "fit-for-purpose" quality groups: RIN <5: not reliable for demanding downstream analysis; 5 ≤RIN <6: suitable for RT-qPCR; 6 ≤RIN <8: suitable for gene array analysis; and RIN ≥8: suitable for all downstream techniques. In general, low RIN values were correlated with fatty, fibrous, pancreatic, or necrotic tissue. When the percentage of samples with RIN ≥6.5 is higher than 90%, the tissue bank performance is adequate. The annual 2011 quality control assessment showed that 90.3% (n=93) of all samples had acceptable RIN values; 97.4% (n=39) of the cancer institute collection had RIN values above 6.5; and 88.6% (n=123) of samples from the liver sample archive collection had RIN values higher than 6.5. As the clinical pathology biopsy collection contained only 58.8% (n=24) acceptable samples, the procurement protocols used for these samples needed immediate evaluation. When the distribution of RIN values of the different collections were compared, no significant differences were found, despite differences in average storage time and temperature. According to the principle of "fit-for-purpose" distribution, the vast majority of samples are considered good enough for most downstream techniques. In conclusion, an annual tissue bank quality control procedure provides useful information on tissue sample quality and sheds light on where and if improvements need to be made.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fit for Purpose Frozen Tissue Collections by RNA Integrity Number-Based Quality Control Assurance at the Erasmus MC Tissue Bank

Kap

Oomen

Arshad

et al. 2014

Biopreservation and Biobanking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has published best practice guidelines for microbial collections and these are similar in scope and tone to the best practice guidelines published by ISBER (Campbell et al 2012). Some collections seek external certifications, such as ISO 9001, although these do not directly deal with the issues of validity of materials in living collections.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of the status of living collections for plant, environmental, and microbial research

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While living collections are critical for biological research, support for these foundational infrastructure elements is inconsistent, which makes quality control, regulatory compliance, and reproducibility difficult. In recent years, the Ecological Society of America has hosted several National Science Foundation-sponsored workshops to explore and enhance the sustainability of biological research infrastructure. At the same time, the United States Culture Collection Network has brought together managers of living collections to foster collaboration and information exchange within a specific living collections community. To assess the sustainability of collections, a survey was distributed to collection scientists whose responses provide a benchmark for evaluating the resiliency of these collections. Among the key observations were that plant collections have larger staffing requirements and that living microbe collections were the most vulnerable to retirements or other disruptions. Many higher plant and vertebrate collections have institutional support and several have endowments. Other collections depend on competitive grant support in an era of intense competition for these resources. Opportunities for synergy among living collections depend upon complementing the natural strong engagement with the research communities that depend on these collections with enhanced information sharing, communication, and collective action to keep them sustainable for the future. External efforts by funding agencies and publishers could reinforce the advantages of having professional management of research resources across every discipline.

show abstract

“…A common forum in which both types of biobanks can participate is highly desirable, as well as a decisive move towards integration in the international biobanking society. Only the A C Camargo Biobank has representatives at the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER), a global forum for sharing knowledge on biobanking [17]. We believe that the exchange of ideas and experiences with other biobanking professionals, as well as the sharing of difficulties, are a source of useful information to improve daily operations.…”

Section: Challenges and Future Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tumor banking for health research in Brazil and Latin America: time to leave the cradle

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer is rapidly growing to be one of the major health burdens in Brazil and Latin America. Access to tumor samples is one of the many barriers that need to be removed in order to promote clinical and translational research aimed at developing and improving cancer prevention and treatment in this region. Although there is a growing interest in establishing tumor collections in many hospitals and institutions, success is limited by the lack of knowledge of the complexities of this activity. This article reviews the regulatory, pathology, and molecular aspects that are relevant to the establishment of tumor banks in Brazil and Latin America. It also provides an overview of key players in the region.

show abstract

Development of the ISBER Best Practices for Repositories: Collection, Storage, Retrieval and Distribution of Biological Materials for Research

Cited by 85 publications

References 0 publications

Fit for Purpose Frozen Tissue Collections by RNA Integrity Number-Based Quality Control Assurance at the Erasmus MC Tissue Bank

Fit for Purpose Frozen Tissue Collections by RNA Integrity Number-Based Quality Control Assurance at the Erasmus MC Tissue Bank

An evaluation of the status of living collections for plant, environmental, and microbial research

Tumor banking for health research in Brazil and Latin America: time to leave the cradle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About