Cited by 20Microfluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsProtein purification and stabilityBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods

Design of experiments as a valuable tool for biopharmaceutical analysis with (imaged) capillary isoelectric focusing

Kahle, Julia, Stein, Matthias, Wätzig, Hermann·2019·ELECTROPHORESIS

Abstract

Capillary isoelectric focusing is indispensable for characterizing charge heterogeneity and isoelectric points of biopharmaceuticals. However, there are many influencing parameters and therefore method development is challenging. This study was performed to obtain an in‐depth understanding of the imaged CIEF methodology by applying a design of experiments approach. To describe the parameter's effects as objectively as possible, a polynomial regression model was derived for the most important responses. For this purpose, the reference monoclonal antibody suggested by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NISTmAb) was used as test molecule. The total concentration and the mixing ratio of two types of carrier ampholytes and the added amounts of urea and l‐arginine were selected as factors. The effects of these factors on 13 different responses such as resolution or p I values were investigated. In order to reduce the total number of experiments, a d‐optimal design with 20 different parameter combinations and six replicates each was chosen. The most significant effects of the four factors were shown for the parameters related to separation efficiency and peak position. In addition, the extent of the factor's effect could be assessed. Depending on the selected factor combination, the p I value can differ up to approximately 0.15 p I units and the resolution value between main peak and adjacent basic peak can range from approximately 1.6 to 2.5, for example.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/elps.201900162

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kahle, J., Stein, M., & Wätzig, H.
Affiliations
Technische Universität Braunschweig (DE)
Corresponding author
Wätzig, Hermann
Venue
ELECTROPHORESIS
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-06-21
Volume
40
Issue
18-19
Pages
2382-2389
ISSN
  • 0173-0835 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-2683
OpenAlex
W2948701187
Cited by
20
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Electrophoresis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Microfluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein purification and stability
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Keywords
capillary isoelectric focusing, experimental design, biopharmaceutical characterization, monoclonal antibodies, isoelectric point, charge heterogeneity, carrier ampholytes, urea, L-arginine, resolution, method development, polynomial regression, D-optimal design
MeSH terms
Ampholyte Mixtures, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Biological Products, Isoelectric Focusing, Research Design, Electrophoresis, Capillary

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review