Evaluating the inter and intra batch variability of protein aggregation behaviour using taylor dispersion analysis and dynamic light scattering
Abstract
Biosimilar pharmaceuticals are complex biological molecules that have similar physicochemical properties to the originator therapeutic protein. They are produced by complex multi-stage processes and are not truly equivalent. Therefore, for a biosimilar to be approved for market it is important to demonstrate that the biological product is highly similar to a reference product. This includes its primary and higher order structures and its aggregation behaviour. Representative lots of both the proposed biosimilar and the reference product are analysed to understand the lot-to-lot variability of both drug substances in the manufacturing processes. Whilst it is not easy to characterise every variation of a protein structure at present additional analytical technologies need to be utilised to ensure the safety and efficacy of any potential biosimilar product. We have explored the use of Taylor dispersion analysis (TDA) to analyse such batch to batch variations in the model protein, bovine serum albumin (BSA) and compared the results to that obtained by conventional dynamic light scattering analysis (DLS). Inter and intra batch differences were evident in all grades of BSA analysed. However, the reproducibility of the TDA measurements, enabled the stability and reversibility of BSA aggregates to be more readily monitored. This demonstrates that Taylor dispersion analysis is a very sensitive technique to study higher order protein states and aggregation. The results, here, also indi…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
BSA's biological origin introduces batch-to-batch variability.
“Its biological origin introduces batch-to-batch variability (Hulse et al., 2013), highlighting opportunities for further refinement toward more defined and standardized systems.”
From Challenges and solutions in transitioning to animal-free standards: a comprehensive analysis of components in human cell-based developmental neurotoxicity assays (2026) · cites this paper as Hulse et al., 2013
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Spänle, J. V., Haiber, L. M., & Seeger, B. (2026) · Frontiers in Toxicology · doi:10.3389/ftox.2026.1800157 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hulse, W. L., Gray, J., & Forbes, R. T.
- Venue
- International Journal of Pharmaceutics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-09
- Volume
- 453
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 351-357
- ISSN
- 0378-5173
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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