In vitro culture has contributed substantially to biomedical research. However, the availability of primary and cancer cells has complicated the choice between the two cell types. The key hurdle in primary cell culture is their establishment in the in vitro environment. The challenging process has led to the emergence of research companies' primary cell developing services. These are private sector investments that contribute to scientific growth. They enable innovations by providing primary cells and saving researchers the hassle of the isolation process.

Primary Cells versus Cell Lines

In 1907, Ross G. Harrison successfully cultivated frog embryo nerve fibers in the in vitro environment, marking the beginning of tissue culture. Another milestone was achieved when HeLa cells, belonging to cervical cancer patient Henrietta Lacks, showed unlimited growth in the tissue culture laboratories. It inspired the development of cell lines with indefinite proliferation within laboratories. The available choices sparked the debate on primary cells vs cell lines. Before selection, the following distinctive properties of both choices should be kept in mind.

Origin: Primary and cancer cell population belong to non-malignant and malignant tissues, respectively. Cell lines also develop from immortalization of Primary Cells by gene transfection or viral infection, which dysregulates the cell cycle. Additionally, telomerase (hTERT) transfection prevents telomere shortening and apoptosis conferring immortalization.

Lifespan: The proliferation ability is the key deciding factor in the selection. Primary cells live up to a few passages and undergo apoptosis. On the contrary, cancer cells proliferate for an indefinite period. Both of them encounter genetic drift and deviate highly from the original population with each subculture.

Tissue Characteristics: The basic difference between the two choices is their tissue characteristics. Primary cells resemble the in vivo tissue characteristics, but with every subculture, they incorporate changes, reducing the similarities with the tissue. Cancer cells retain the properties of malignant tissue, whereas cell lines have the least resemblance to the tissue.  

Homogeneity: Research emphasizes on reproducibility which in turn requires consistency in cells. However, population and tissue demonstrate variation that is reflected in cells. Primary cell population is pooled from several donors and thus constitute a heterogeneous population. Cancer cells show the tumor tissue heterogeneity but in vitro cultures immortalized in the laboratory are relatively homogenous.

Advantages vs Disadvantages

The difference between the cell types grants them advantages and disadvantages that can aid in the choice between them.

Culture: The finite life span of primary cells makes their in vitro culture difficult. They require growth factors and a medium specific for their survival and proliferation. The short lifespan also limits the cell quantity available for assays, mandating repeated procurement or isolation. Cancer cells are typically easy to cultivate in vitro with minimal requirements for optimal growth. They are available in sufficient quantities to conduct multiple assays.

Relevance: Similarities with the tissue provide more accurate results which are reproducible in the in vivo models. Thus, primary cells have established their significance over the other options. Cancer cells have applications in oncology research, but cannot be exploited for other fields.

Weighing the advantages and drawbacks can assist in making a suitable selection. The lack of donors and the need for surgical procedures for isolation, together with limited life span, make primary cell culture difficult, redirecting the focus on other alternatives. Few of them only live up to five or fewer passages, either undergoing differentiation or apoptosis. Therefore, the alternatives gain preference as suitable in vitro models for long-term studies.

Primary Cell Developing Services

The establishment of primary cell culture is a complicated process that demands optimization at every step. It entails investment in terms of money and time. A research laboratory has limited resources to spend in this direction without the assurance of quality. Their budgets and deadlines often redirect them towards Primary Cell Developing Services. These are private sector ventures focused on manufacturing these cultures with high quality. 

Kosheeka is one such venture that incorporates an expert team of scientists and streamlined workflows. They result in short turnaround times. Its regulatory compliance and advanced facilities demonstrate its dedication to culture services. It offers custom solutions that align with the research needs of the scientists. Its experts also guide the researchers for the in vitro culture process and any issues faced during experimentation.

Final Thoughts

The selection between the cell types for research have been subjected to debate for years. The choice boils down to cost constraints and study design. Low budget promotes the use of immortal populations, whereas future applications in the in vivo models underscore the use of primary cells. The extraction and culture of the latter is a complex process beyond the limits of the research laboratory. Research companies facilitate scientific explorations by establishing their cultures and offering them at reasonable charges. It reduces the financial burden on researchers, saving valuable time and efforts. Kosheeka is a cell manufacturer company with a diversified inventory of cells and its products, delivered with assured quality to elevate biomedical research.