Understanding Error Contribution of Liquid Handling and ... · Liquid handlers, plate readers, etc....
Transcript of Understanding Error Contribution of Liquid Handling and ... · Liquid handlers, plate readers, etc....
© 2012 ARTEL
Understanding Error Contribution of Liquid Handling and Analytical Equipment to Overall Assay Performance
ELRIGManchester, EnglandSeptember 6, 2012
John Thomas Bradshaw, Ph.D.Artel, Inc.
© 2012 ARTEL
The world would be a simpler place if the “Black Box” existed!
The “Black Box”
input output
© 2012 ARTEL
Automation and Analytical Lab Equipment (e.g., liquid handlers, plate mixers, plate readers) can be powerful tools when their performance is Measured and Controlled.
Automation is My Friend
© 2012 ARTEL
What Do You WANT and EXPECT From Your“Robot Friend”?
Simple goals for your liquid handler (or plate reader, etc). It should… Reproducibly deliver the target volume with high
accuracy & precision
“Behave” – it should have consistent, predictable behavior according to the programmed methods and scripts (volume transfer, washing, mixing, alignment with labware, etc.)
© 2012 ARTEL
To know, the performance must be Measured and Controlled.
How to know if your Robot Friend is “Behaving”he
ight
= x
head diameter = y
© 2012 ARTEL
Assessing Liquid Handler Performance
© 2012 ARTEL
How is performance of an automated liquid handler evaluated, monitored and/or maintained? MVS Gravimetric methods Fluorescence/Absorbance methods Combination Other home-brew methods
Assessing Liquid Handler Performance
Accuracy and precision should be assessed on a tip-by-tip basis – some of the above methods do not capture this important information without a lot of time, skill and effort
© 2012 ARTEL
OverviewOverview of MVS Dual-Dye Photometric Method
© 2012 ARTEL
Output Report:Performance Well-by-well and Tip-by-tip
Well-by-well data
Failed wells
Failed tip
Tip-by-tip data
© 2012 ARTEL
Artel MVS Multichannel Verification System:Becoming a Standard
Beckman - World-wide use of Artel MVS by service team for OQ of automated liquid handlers
Tecan - Integration of Artel technology into QC Kit for verification of automated liquid handlers
Forensics labs, bio-pharma labs, government test labs, etc.
For more info on the MVS, please visit the Technopath/Artel booth.
© 2012 ARTEL
Liquid Handler Precision and Accuracy:The Impact of Not Knowing
© 2012 ARTEL
Monitoring Liquid Handler Performance at 10 L: Precision Only
All experiments A – G seem relatively similar
Precision only measurements – the amount of volume, may or may not be ‘correct’, but all the volume transfers are repeatable; all tips are
performing the same.
© 2012 ARTEL
By measuring accuracy, reagent concentration can be determined tip-by-tip and well-by-well and the assay’s characteristics are more defined, enabling a
more quantitative methodology.
Monitoring Liquid Handler Performance at 10 L: Precision and Accuracy
© 2012 ARTEL
Monitoring Liquid Handler Performance at 10 L:Knowing Accuracy, and Therefore, Concentration
6.80 L
9.97 L
10 L of critical compound (2 mM), 40 L total working volume
Method D – (6.80 L)(2 mM)/(40 L) = 0.34 mMMethod G – (9.97 L)(2 mM)/(40 L) = 0.499 mM
% difference in compound concentration = 35.2%(if experimental total working volume equals theoretical)
© 2012 ARTEL
Liquid Handler Optimization
© 2012 ARTEL
Optimizing Liquid Handler Performance After Sequential Parameter Adjustment
Sequential Parameter Adjustment
Albert & Bradshaw, J. Assoc. Lab. Autom., 2007, 12, 172 – 180.
© 2012 ARTEL
Optimizing Liquid Handler Performance After Sequential Parameter Adjustment
By tweaking and measuring (iteratively), liquid handler methods can easily be optimized when there is a standardized “yard stick” to compare results
© 2012 ARTEL
Facilitating a Bench-to-Automation Transfer of a PCR Assay
© 2012 ARTEL
Facilitating Method Transfer: Assay Transfer and Liquid Handling Steps
Target volumes delivered to the working assay
Who or what is used for the volume transfer steps? How are the volumes
measured? Quantified?
Target volumes delivered to the
‘transferred’ assay
Are the volumes equal or comparable?
=
© 2012 ARTEL
Troubleshooting After Transferring a Manual PCR Assay to Automation: ACCURACY MATTERS (1 of 2)
≠
Manual Method Automated Method• 10 µL Sample – In Excess; not a critical volume transfer step• 15 µL Master Mix – CRITICAL STEP; accuracy required• Thermocycler for 1.5 hours
© 2012 ARTEL
Accuracy Matters: Transferring & Troubleshooting a Manual PCR Assay to Automation (2 of 2)
Manual PCR assay “works” Automated PCR assay does not work
MVS used for liquid handler optimization, automation accurately dispenses critical target volume (15 L)
Automated PCR assay still does not work
MVS used to assess technician pipetting proficiency The technician was over-pipetting master mix (15.67 L)
The automation was adjusted to deliver the same volume as the manual method
Automated PCR assay worked – SUCCESS! “The automation was not to blame”
© 2012 ARTEL
Microtiter Plate Readers:How well do they agree?
© 2012 ARTEL
Microtiter Plate Readers = Vertical Beam Spectrophotometers
© 2012 ARTEL
Absorbance Comparison - Experiment
96-well plate filled with different concentrations of red dye solution
Plate measured on test readers and on a reference reader
6 different reader types were tested against a reference reader
© 2012 ARTEL
Plate Reader Absorbance of Several Readers vs. a Reference System
Ref Plate Reader = Single-channel, interference filterPlate Reader A = Single-channel, monochromatorPlate Reader B = Single-channel, interference filterPlate Reader C = Single-channel, interference filterPlate Reader D = Single-channel, monochromatorPlate Reader E = 8-channel, monochromatorPlate Reader F = 8-channel, interference filter
© 2012 ARTEL
Photometric Noise as a function of Optical Density
Solution-filled plates were measured ten times each reader.
The CV for each well was calculated and a pooled CV was determined at each absorbance level.
Reader A Reader B Reader CNominal
Absorbance %CV %CV %CV0.15 0.160% 0.460% 0.162%0.25 0.110% 0.340% 0.112%0.5 0.080% 0.210% 0.082%1.2 0.060% 0.170% 0.057%2.4 0.090% 0.260% 0.088%
© 2012 ARTEL
Plate Reader Absorbance of Several Readers vs. a Reference System
Ref Plate Reader = Single-channel, interference filterPlate Reader A = Single-channel, monochromatorPlate Reader B = Single-channel, interference filterPlate Reader C = Single-channel, interference filterPlate Reader D = Single-channel, monochromatorPlate Reader E = 8-channel, monochromatorPlate Reader F = 8-channel, interference filter
© 2012 ARTEL
Plate Reader E (8-Channel, monochromator) vs. Reference Plate Reader
Channels behave independently from one another. This one unit essentially acts like 8 separate
spectrophotometers.
© 2012 ARTEL
Plate Reader E (8-Channel, monochromator) vs. Reference Plate Reader
Channel differences become more apparent when compared to the median of the channels.
© 2012 ARTEL
Assessment of Plate Mixing Efficiency:“On-board” Mixing Using the Liquid Handler
© 2012 ARTEL
Measuring CV After Mixing:Aspirate/Dispense Cycles vs. MVS Shaker
1-tip, 16 reps, three different target
volumes; 96-well plate
After each dispense, 3 “common” aspirate/dispense
cycles used to mix
Read plate with MVS
Same plateShaken on MVS Plate Shaker
(1) Re-read plate with MVS reader
(2) Shake Again(3) Read plate a
third time
© 2012 ARTEL
The original mixing method (aspirate/dispense steps) was not efficient. Customer had to notify other sister sites using same method. Note – diffusion time helped the mixing process for the 2-uL data in the original mixing method.
Measuring CV After Mixing:Aspirate/Dispense Cycles vs. MVS Shaker
© 2012 ARTEL
Lab-to-Lab Comparison
© 2012 ARTEL
2 L (P20 tool) 10 L (P200L tool)
Directly Comparing Identical Robots & Methods at Multiple Locations
- Three different forensics laboratories (in three different cities)- Same robot models (Biomek 3000)- Same head and tip types- Exact methods and techniques employed in each lab
© 2012 ARTEL
Tech 1 Tech 2
J. Assoc. Lab. Autom., 2007, 12, 172-180.
Directly Comparing Operator Pipetting Proficiency *
* Two different technicians dispensing 20 L of same reagents in the samelaboratory with the same 8-tip, electronic pipette within minutes of each other
© 2012 ARTEL
Conclusions: Importance of Knowing Equipment Behavior
Liquid handlers, plate readers, etc. are powerful tools, but need to be Measured and Controlled.
Measuring volume accuracy and precision for the assay of interest will help build confidence in the capabilities of your liquid handler.
Not Measuring = Not Knowing
© 2012 ARTEL
Thank youArtel Corporate Headquarters25 Bradley DriveWestbrook, Maine 04092, USA
Tel: (207) 854-0860 Fax: (207) 854-0867 Email: [email protected]: www.artel-usa.com
© 2012 ARTEL