A Streamlined Solution for Antibody Validation

Antibodies are used in laboratories and clinics to study proteins. Because of their importance, many companies make antibodies as commercial products, which they sell for scientific studies and for use in clinical settings. However, a study published yesterday in eLife points to the need for better antibody validation, and it outlines a process that other labs can use to make sure the antibodies they work with function properly.

Studies have shown that many commercially available antibodies do not specifically identify the proteins that they are supposed to detect. This casts doubt onto the research that has used these antibodies and underlines the need for an accurate, standard process to test antibody quality.

In the current study, researchers used a human protein as a test case both to highlight the antibody validation problem and to demonstrate a procedure that other labs can use to validate their antibodies. The protein they focused on was the product of the C9ORF72 gene, mutations in which are the major genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia.

After testing sixteen antibodies that were advertised by companies to be specific for C9ORF72, the team found that only one accurately detected C9ORF72 using immunofluorescence and that other techniques were successful with two other antibodies. Unfortunately, the antibodies that passed the validation criteria have not yet been used in scientific studies, while the antibodies that failed have been used in multiple studies.

Science is facing a crisis in reproducibility. Study results are often impossible to replicate, lack of effective antibodies contributes to the problem. In the new paper, the researchers describe their method of validation, which other labs can replicate to make sure their antibodies function properly.

“As we worked on our C9ORF72 paper, it became less about one gene and more about a template other labs can use to validate antibodies,” says senior author Peter McPherson of McGill University. “The procedures we use are not revolutionary, and in fact this makes our approach widely applicable to any laboratory skilled in the art, yet to my knowledge this is one of the first papers to describe a streamlined process for antibody validation. A large part of the reproducibility crisis is because of poor antibody validation. We owe it to funders and patients to do better.”

Image: A new study points to the need for better antibody validation and outlines a process that other labs can use to make sure the antibodies they work with function properly. Image courtesy of The Neuro.