CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54

Engineering Challenges in Therapeutic Protein Product and Process Design

Papathanasiou, Maria M., Kontoravdi, Cleo·2020·Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering
DOI 10.1016/j.coche.2019.11.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.1016/j.coche.2019.11.010

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Different structures of the same protein are often present in biopharmaceutical preparations, making them heterogeneous mixtures including post-translational modifications such as glycosylation, oxidation, deamidation, aggregates, and fragments that impact drug stability and efficacy.

    “Different structures of the same protein are often present in biopharmaceutical preparations, making them a heterogeneous mixture, including post‐translational modifications such as glycosylation, oxidation, deamidation, formation of aggregates and fragments impacting the stability and efficacy of the drug [35].”

    From Current PAT Landscape in the Downstream Processing of Biopharmaceuticals (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Goey CH, Tsang JMH, Bell D, Kontoravdi C: Cascading effect in bioprocessing-the impact of mild hypothermia on CHO cell behavior and host cell protein composition. Biotechnol Bioeng 2017, 114:2771-2781 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bit.26437. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Rathore AS, Winkle H: Quality by design for biopharmaceuticals. Nat Biotechnol 2009, 27:26-34 http://dx. doi.org/10.1038/nbt0109-26. · DOI
  3. Del Val IJ, Kontoravdi C, Nagy JM: Towards the implementation of quality by design to the production of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies with desired glycosylation patterns. Biotechnol Prog 2010, 26:1505-1527 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ btpr.470. · DOI
  4. Villiger TK, Roulet A, Pe ´rilleux A, Stettler M, Broly H, Morbidelli M et al.: Controlling the time evolution of mAb N-linked glycosylation, part I: microbioreactor experiments. Biotechnol Prog 2016, 32:1123-1134 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/btpr.2305. · DOI
  5. Radhakrishnan D, Robinson A, Ogunnaike B: Controlling the glycosylation profile in mAbs using time-dependent media supplementation. Antibodies 2017, 7:1.
  6. Naik HM, Majewska NI, Betenbaugh MJ: Impact of nucleotide sugar metabolism on protein N-glycosylation in Chinese Hamster ovary (CHO) cell culture. Curr Opin Chem Eng 2018, 22:167-176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.COCHE.2018.10.002. · DOI
  7. Sokolov M, Ritscher J, MacKinnon N, Souquet J, Broly H, Morbidelli M et al.: Enhanced process understanding and multivariate prediction of the relationship between cell culture process and monoclonal antibody quality. Biotechnol Prog 2017, 33:1368-1380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/btpr.2502. · DOI
  8. Kotidis P, Jedrzejewski P, Sou SN, Sellick C, Polizzi K, del Val IJ et al.: Model-based optimization of antibody galactosylation in CHO cell culture. Biotechnol Bioeng 2019, 116:1612-1626 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1002/bit.26960. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Kotidis P, Demis P, Goey CH, Correa E, McIntosh C, Trepekli S et al.: Constrained global sensitivity analysis for bioprocess design space identification. Comput Chem Eng 2019, 125:558- 568 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPCHEMENG.2019.01.022. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Amann T, Hansen AH, Kol S, Hansen HG, Arnsdorf J, Nallapareddy S et al.: Glyco-engineered CHO cell lines producing alpha-1-antitrypsin and C1 esterase inhibitor with fully humanized N-glycosylation profiles. Metab Eng 2019, 52:143-152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.YMBEN.2018.11.014. · DOI
  11. Lapolla A, Tonani R, Fedele D, Garbeglio M, Senesi A, Seraglia R et al.: Non-enzymatic glycation of IgG: an in vivo study. Horm Metab Res 2002, 34:260-264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2002- 32140. · DOI
  12. Agarwal N, Mason A, Pradhan R, Kemper J, Bosley A, Serfiotis- Mitsa D et al.: Kinetic modeling as a tool to understand the influence of cell culture process parameters on the glycation of monoclonal antibody biotherapeutics. Biotechnol Prog 2019, 35:e2865 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/btpr.2865. · DOI
  13. Eon-Duval A, Broly H, Gleixner R: Quality attributes of recombinant therapeutic proteins: an assessment of impact on safety and efficacy as part of a quality by design development approach. Biotechnol Prog 2012, 28:608-622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/btpr.1548. · DOI · Paper page
  14. van der Kant R, Karow-Zwick AR, Van Durme J, Blech M, Gallardo R, Seeliger D et al.: Prediction and reduction of the aggregation of monoclonal antibodies. J Mol Biol 2017, 429:1244-1261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.JMB.2017.03.014. · DOI
  15. Wang W, Roberts CJ: Protein aggregation -mechanisms, detection, and control. Int J Pharm 2018, 550:251-268 http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPHARM.2018.08.043. · DOI
  16. Wang S, Wu G, Zhang X, Tian Z, Zhang N, Hu T et al.: Stabilizing two IgG1 monoclonal antibodies by surfactants: balance between aggregation prevention and structure perturbation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2017, 114:263-277 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/J.EJPB.2017.01.025. · DOI
  17. Jin W, Xing Z, Song Y, Huang C, Xu X, Ghose S et al.: Protein aggregation and mitigation strategy in low pH viral inactivation for monoclonal antibody purification. mAbs 2019:1-13 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420862.2019.1658493. · DOI
  18. Chiu J, Valente KN, Levy NE, Min L, Lenhoff AM, Lee KH: Knockout of a difficult-to-remove CHO host cell protein, lipoprotein lipase, for improved polysorbate stability in monoclonal antibody formulations. Biotechnol Bioeng 2017, 114:1006-1015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bit.26237. This study demonstrates the potential for host cell engineering in order to reduce the burden of downstream processing and, at the same time, increase the stability of the drug product. · DOI
  19. Andre ´S, Cristau L, Saint, Gaillard S, Devos O, Calvosa E ´, Duponchel L: In-line and real-time prediction of recombinant antibody titer by in situ Raman spectroscopy. Anal Chim Acta 2015, 892:148-152.
  20. Li M-Y, Ebel B, Paris C, Chauchard F, Guedon E, Marc A: Real- time monitoring of antibody glycosylation site occupancy by in situ Raman spectroscopy during bioreactor CHO cell cultures. Biotechnol Prog 2018, 34:486-493.
  21. Aleandri S, Vaccaro A, Armenta R, Vo ¨lker A, Kuentz M: Dynamic light scattering of biopharmaceutics-can analytical performance be enhanced by laser power? Pharmaceutics 2018, 10:94.
  22. Konstantinov KB, Cooney CL: White paper on continuous bioprocessing may 20-21, 2014 continuous manufacturing symposium. J Pharm Sci 2015, 104:813-820.
  23. Shang Y, Zeng Y, Zeng Y: Integrated microfluidic lectin barcode platform for high-performance focused glycomic profiling. Sci Rep 2016, 6:20297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep20297. · DOI
  24. Grossmann C, Erdem G, Morari M, Amanullah M, Mazzotti M, Morbidelli M: "Cycle to cycle" optimizing control of simulated moving beds. AIChE J 2008, 54:194-208 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/aic.11346. · DOI
  25. Rathore AS, Kateja N, Kumar D: Process integration and control in continuous bioprocessing. Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering. Elsevier Ltd; 2018:18-25.
  26. Ru ¨dt M, Brestrich N, Rolinger L, Hubbuch J: Real-time monitoring and control of the load phase of a protein A capture step. Biotechnol Bioeng 2017, 114:368-373 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/bit.26078. This is a solid work showcasing the potential of combined in vitro/in silico approaches in online bioprocess monitoring. · DOI
  27. Polizzi KM, Kontoravdi C: Genetically-encoded biosensors for monitoring cellular stress in bioprocessing. Current Opinion in Biotechnology. Elsevier Ltd; 2015:50-56.
  28. Aehle M, Bork K, Schaepe S, Kuprijanov A, Horstkorte R, Simutis R et al.: Increasing batch-to-batch reproducibility of CHO-cell cultures using a model predictive control approach. Cytotechnology 2012, 64(6):623-634 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10616-012-9438-1. · DOI
  29. Teixeira AP, Alves C, Alves PM, Carrondo MJT, Oliveira R: Hybrid elementary flux analysis/nonparametric modeling: application for bioprocess control. BMC Bioinf 2007, 8:1-15 http://dx.doi. org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-30. · DOI
  30. Holmqvist A, Magnusson F: Open-loop optimal control of batch chromatographic separation processes using direct collocation. J Process Control 2016, 46:55-74 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/J.JPROCONT.2016.08.002. · DOI
  31. Behrens M, Khobkhun P, Potschka A, Engell S: Optimizing set point control of the MCSGP process. 2014 European Control Conference 2014, vol 2014:1139-1144.
  32. Kra ¨ttli M, Steinebach F, Morbidelli M: Online control of the twin- column countercurrent solvent gradient process for biochromatography. J Chromatogr A 2013, 1293:51-59 http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2013.03.069. · DOI
  33. Kra ¨ttli M, Stro ¨hlein G, Aumann L, Mu ¨ller-Spa ¨th T, Morbidelli M: Closed loop control of the multi-column solvent gradient purification process. J Chromatogr A 2011, 1218:9028-9036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2011.09.081. · DOI
  34. Steinebach F, Angarita M, Karst DJ, Mu ¨ller-Spa ¨th T, Morbidelli M: Model based adaptive control of a continuous capture process for monoclonal antibodies production. J Chromatogr A 2016:50-56 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2016.03.014. · DOI
  35. Papathanasiou MM, Burnak B, Katz J, Mu ¨ller-Spa ¨th T, Morbidelli M, Shah N et al.: Control of small-scale chromatographic systems under disturbances. Comput Aided Chem Eng 2019, 47:269-274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0- 12-818597-1.50043-6. · DOI
  36. Papathanasiou MM, Burnak B, Katz J, Shah N, Pistikopoulos EN: Assisting continuous biomanufacturing through advanced control in downstream purification. Comput Chem Eng 2019:232-248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. compchemeng.2019.03.013. · DOI
  37. Papathanasiou MM, Quiroga-Campano AL, Steinebach F, Elviro M, Mantalaris A, Pistikopoulos EN: Advanced model-based control strategies for the intensification of upstream and downstream processing in mAb production. Biotechnol Prog 2017, 33:966-988.
  38. Papathanasiou MM, Steinebach F, Morbidelli M, Mantalaris A, Pistikopoulos EN: Intelligent, model-based control towards the intensification of downstream processes. Comput Chem Eng 2017, 105:173-184.
  39. Charaniya S, Hu W-S, Karypis G: Mining bioprocess data: opportunities and challenges. Trends Biotechnol 2008, 26:690- 699 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.TIBTECH.2008.09.003. · DOI
  40. Papathanasiou MM, Avraamidou S, Oberdieck R, Mantalaris A, Steinebach F, Morbidelli M et al.: Advanced control strategies for the multicolumn countercurrent solvent gradient purification process. AIChE J 2016, 62:2341-2357.
  41. Hummel J, Pagkaliwangan M, Gjoka X, Davidovits T, Stock R, Ransohoff T et al.: Modeling the downstream processing of monoclonal antibodies reveals cost advantages for continuous methods for a broad range of manufacturing scales. Biotechnol J 2019, 14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ biot.201700665 1700665. · DOI
  42. Hernandez R: Continuous manufacturing: a changing processing paradigm. BioPharm Int 2015 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/512020a. · DOI
  43. Hutter S, Wolf M, Papili Gao N, Lepori D, Schweigler T, Morbidelli M et al.: Glycosylation flux analysis of immunoglobulin g in Chinese hamster ovary perfusion cell culture. Processes 2018, 6:176 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ pr6100176. · DOI
  44. Bielser J-M, Chappuis L, Xiao Y, Souquet J, Broly H, Morbidelli M: Perfusion cell culture for the production of conjugated recombinant fusion proteins reduces clipping and quality heterogeneity compared to batch-mode processes. J Biotechnol 2019, 302:26-31 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J. JBIOTEC.2019.06.006. This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of the effect of switching from fed-batch cell culture to perfusion on a range of critical quality attributes of a recombinant protein product. · DOI
  45. Somasundaram B, Pleitt K, Shave E, Baker K, Lua LHL: Progression of continuous downstream processing of monoclonal antibodies: current trends and challenges [internet]. Biotechnology and Bioengineering. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2018:2893-2907 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bit.26812. · DOI
  46. Girard V, Hilbold NJ, Ng CKS, Pegon L, Chahim W, Rousset F et al.: Large-scale monoclonal antibody purification by continuous chromatography, from process design to scale-up. J Biotechnol 2015, 213:65-73 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jbiotec.2015.04.026. · DOI
  47. Hunt B, Goddard C, Middelberg APJ, O'Neill BK: Economic analysis of immunoadsorption systems. Biochem Eng J 2001, 9:135-145 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1369-703X(01)00136-X. · DOI
  48. Gronemeyer P, Ditz R, Strube J: Trends in upstream and downstream process development for antibody manufacturing. Bioengineering 2014, 1:188-212 http://dx.doi. org/10.3390/bioengineering1040188. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Papathanasiou, M. M., & Kontoravdi, C.
Venue
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
27
Pages
81-88
ISSN
2211-3398
DOI
10.1016/j.coche.2019.11.010
Cited by
54
References
5
Language
en
Licence

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