Cited by 16Molecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsProtein purification and stability

Direct real-time quantitative PCR for measurement of host-cell residual DNA in therapeutic proteins

Peper, Grit, Fankhauser, Alexander, Merlin, Thomas, Roscic, Ana, Hofmann, Matthias, Obrdlik, Petr·2014·Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

Abstract

Real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) is important for quantification of residual host cell DNA (resDNA) in therapeutic protein preparations. Typical qPCR protocols involve DNA extraction steps complicating sample handling. Here, we describe a "direct qPCR" approach without DNA extraction. To avoid interferences of DNA polymerase with a therapeutic protein, proteins in the samples were digested with proteinase K (PK) in the presence of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS). Tween 20 and NaCl were included to minimize precipitation of therapeutic proteins in the PK/SDS mix. After PK treatment, the solution was applied directly for qPCR. Inhibition of DNA polymerase by SDS was prevented by adding 2% (v/v) of Tween 20 to the final qPCR mix. The direct qPCR approach was evaluated for quantification of resDNA in therapeutic proteins manufactured in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) host cells. First, direct qPCR was compared with qPCR applied on purified DNA ("extraction qPCR"). For both qPCRs, the same CHO-specific primers and probes were used. Comparable residual DNA levels were detected with both PCR approaches in purified and highly concentrated drug proteins as well as in in-process-control samples. Finally, the CHO-specific direct qPCR protocol was validated according to ICH guidelines and applied for 25 different therapeutic proteins. The specific limits of quantification were 0.1-0.8ppb for 24 proteins, and 2.0ppb for one protein. General applicability of the direct qPCR was demonstrated by…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpba.2014.07.032

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peper, G., Fankhauser, A., Merlin, T., Roscic, A., Hofmann, M., & Obrdlik, P.
Affiliations
Novartis (Switzerland) (CH)
Corresponding author
Obrdlik, Petr
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-11
Volume
100
Pages
123-130
ISSN
0731-7085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060060483
Cited by
16
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein purification and stability
Keywords
therapeutic proteins, proteinase K digestion, sodium dodecyl sulfate, Tween 20, DNA polymerase inhibition, CHO cell culture, in-process control, method validation, ICH guidelines, Escherichia coli expression
MeSH terms
Animals, Buffers, Cricetulus, DNA, Drug Contamination, Escherichia coli, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Recombinant Proteins, Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate, Transfection, Reproducibility of Results, CHO Cells, Endopeptidase K, Mice, Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

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