alexa Limits in virus filtration capability? Impact of virus quality and spike level on virus removal with xenotropic murine leukemia virus.
Chemical Engineering

Chemical Engineering

Journal of Chromatography & Separation Techniques

Author(s): Roush DJ, Myrold A, Burnham MS, And JV, Hughes JV, Roush DJ, Myrold A, Burnham MS, And JV, Hughes JV

Abstract Share this page

Abstract Virus filtration (VF) is a key step in an overall viral clearance process since it has been demonstrated to effectively clear a wide range of mammalian viruses with a log reduction value (LRV) > 4. The potential to achieve higher LRV from virus retentive filters has historically been examined using bacteriophage surrogates, which commonly demonstrated a potential of > 9 LRV when using high titer spikes (e.g. 10(10) PFU/mL). However, as the filter loading increases, one typically experiences significant decreases in performance and LRV. The 9 LRV value is markedly higher than the current expected range of 4-5 LRV when utilizing mammalian retroviruses on virus removal filters (Miesegaes et al., Dev Biol (Basel) 2010;133:3-101). Recent values have been reported in the literature (Stuckey et al., Biotech Progr 2014;30:79-85) of LRV in excess of 6 for PPV and XMuLV although this result appears to be atypical. LRV for VF with therapeutic proteins could be limited by several factors including process limits (flux decay, load matrix), virus spike level and the analytical methods used for virus detection (i.e. the Limits of Quantitation), as well as the virus spike quality. Research was conducted using the Xenotropic-Murine Leukemia Virus (XMuLV) for its direct relevance to the most commonly cited document, the International Conference of Harmonization (ICH) Q5A (International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, Geneva, Switzerland, 1999) for viral safety evaluations. A unique aspect of this work is the independent evaluation of the impact of retrovirus quality and virus spike level on VF performance and LRV. The VF studies used XMuLV preparations purified by either ultracentrifugation (Ultra 1) or by chromatographic processes that yielded a more highly purified virus stock (Ultra 2). Two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) with markedly different filtration characteristics and with similar levels of aggregate (<1.5\%) were evaluated with the Ultra 1 and Ultra 2 virus preparations utilizing the Planova 20 N, a small virus removal filter. Impurities in the virus preparation ultimately limited filter loading as measured by determining the volumetric loading condition where 75\% flux decay is observed versus initial conditions (V75). This observation occurred with both Mabs with the difference in virus purity more pronounced when very high spike levels were used (>5 vol/vol \%). Significant differences were seen for the process performance over a number of lots of the less-pure Ultra 1 virus preparations. Experiments utilizing a developmental lot of the chromatographic purified XMuLV (Ultra 2 Development lot) that had elevated levels of host cell residuals (vs. the final Ultra 2 preparations) suggest that these contaminant residuals can impact virus filter fouling, even if the virus prep is essentially monodisperse. Process studies utilizing an Ultra 2 virus with substantially less host cell residuals and highly monodispersed virus particles demonstrated superior performance and an LRV in excess of 7.7 log10 . A model was constructed demonstrating the linear dependence of filtration flux versus filter loading which can be used to predict the V75 for a range of virus spike levels conditions using this highly purified virus. Fine tuning the virus spike level with this model can ultimately maximize the LRV for the virus filter step, essentially adding the LRV equivalent of another process step (i.e. protein A or CEX chromatography). © 2014 American Institute of Chemical Engineers. This article was published in Biotechnol Prog and referenced in Journal of Chromatography & Separation Techniques

Recommended Conferences

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri, Food, Aqua and Veterinary Science Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Clinical and Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Earth & Environmental Sciences

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science and Health care Journals

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics and Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Informatics Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Material Sciences Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Mathematics and Physics Journals

Jim Willison

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

John Behannon

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords