Biosafety during a pandemic: shared resource laboratories rise to the challenge

Abstract

Biosafety has always been an important aspect of daily work in any research institution, particularly for cytometry Shared Resources Laboratories (SRLs). SRLs are common-use spaces that facilitate the sharing of knowledge, expertise, and ideas. This sharing inescapably involves contact and interaction of all those within this working environment on a daily basis. The current pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has prompted the re-evaluation of many policies governing the operations of SRLs. Here we identify and review the unique challenges SRLs face in maintaining biosafety standards, highlighting the potential risks associated with not only cytometry instrumentation and samples, but also the people working with them. We propose possible solutions to safety issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic and provide tools for facilities to adapt to evolving guidelines and future challenges.

Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; biosafety guidelines; cytometry; emerging disease; epidemic; flow cytometry; pandemic; shared resource laboratory (SRL).

FIGURE 1

Effective communication between investigator, shared resource laboratory, and safety officer ensures a cohesive approach when defining biological safety assessment in the context of an SRL. As in everything we do, our ability to identify the risks, assess them, and then go on to manage them is limited by our ability to communicate with all involved parties. It is in the framing of these biosafety discussions that SRL staff can have the most impact, where the focus is understanding, communicating perceived risks, followed by collaborating to determine an appropriate safety response. While compromise may not always be possible, there are invariably instances where inclusion of users leads to innovative solutions and new approaches to safety. There is a certain amount of trust required between users and SRL staff. This trust is developed by having ongoing discussions around safety, developing a cultural expectation of safety and continued inclusive discussions. There is a significant mental and time burden to the maintenance and communication of appropriate biological risk management. However, it is imperative, especially during pandemics, that SRLs have effective processes in place to ensure the safety of everyone who uses their space [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

FIGURE 2

Murine spleen cells stained with 25‐color high‐dimensional panel and treated with four differing fixation protocols: Unfixed, fixed with 4% formaldehyde solution at room temperature for 30 min (4% PFA @ 30 min RT), fixed with 4% formaldehyde solution at 4°C for 30 min (4% PFA @ 30 min 4°C), or fixed with 4% formaldehyde solution at 4°C for 30 min followed by 30 min at room temperature (4% PFA @ 30 min 4°C + 30 min RT). After fixation, cells were washed and immediately acquired on a spectral cytometer, Cytek® Aurora (Cytek® Biosciences, Freemont, CA). The effect of the fixation was examined on (A) the forward versus side scatter plots (FSC‐A vs SSC‐A), (B) population identification, separation, and signal resolution of specific immune cell populations, (C) the median fluorescence intensity (MFI) of the positive population of single (blue) and tandem (red) fluorophores, and (D) the separation ratio between the positive and negative populations of single (blue) and tandem (red) fluorophores. Note: That autofluorescence was not used as a separate parameter for spectral unmixing [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

FIGURE 3

Example placement of a 3‐laser benchtop analyzer inside a Class II Biological Safety Cabinet [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]