CONCLUSIONS
As demonstrated in this case study, taking a structured, documented, and disciplined approach to process transfers is crucial
to the success of a transfer. While some process changes are inevitable due to facility fit reasons or differences in operational
practices, it is important to avoid introducing unnecessary process changes as part of the transfer. Applying the quality
risk-management concept in the process-transfer strategy ensures that the potential risk from each potential change is analyzed
rigorously and the risk-mitigation and control measures are commensurate with the risks. With the proper use of both scale-down
models and full-scale engineering runs, the chance of surprises during the qualification campaign can be greatly reduced.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge Eric Ordonez, Tom Lecocq, Mark Iversen, Shirin Fuller, Sean Forestell, Raymond Arnold,
Robert Kiss, and Harry Lam for their valuable technical contributions and critical review. We also thank Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharma GmbH & Co. KG for their collaboration on the work presented in this article.
Jean Harms* is a technical manager in quality operations, and Purav Dave is an engineer II in global biologics manufacturing science and technology, both at Genentech, a member of the Roche Group.
*To whom correspondance should be addressed, harms.jingjin@gene.com
.
REFERENCES
1. K. Carswell, presentation at the IBC 24th International Conference, (San Diego, CA, 2009).
2. A. Mire-Sluis et al., BioProcess Int.
8 (3), 20–32 (2010).
3. F. Li et al., Biotechnol. Prog.
22 (3), 696– 703 (2006).
4. M. Winkler, "Problems in Fermenter Design and Operation," in Chemical Engineering Problems in Biotechnology, M. Winkler Ed, (Elsevier Science 1990), pp. 222–350.
5. S. Mostafa and X. Gu, Biotechnol. Prog. 19 (1), 45–51 (2003).
6. K. van't Riet, Trends in Biotechnol. 1, 113–119 (1983).
7. V. DeZengotita, A. Schmelzer, and W. Miller, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 77 (4), 369–380 (2002).
8. M. Zhu et al., Biotechnol. Prog. 21 (1), 70–77 (2005).
9. R. Kimura and W. Miller, Biotechnol. Prog., 13 (3), 311–317 (1997).
10. A. Kirdar, K. Green, and A. Rathore, Biotechnol. Prog. 24 (3), 720–726 (2008).
11. V. Saucedo et al., Biotechnol. Prog. 27 (3), 885–890 (2011).
12. M. Gawlitzek et al., Biotechnol. Bioeng. 103 (3), 1164–1175 (2009).
13. R. Godoy-Silva et al., Biotechnol. Bioeng., 103 (6), 1103–1117 (2009).
14. B. Vickroy, K. Lorenz, and W. Kelly, Biotechnol. Prog., 23 (1), 194–199 (2007).
15. Y. Maa and C. Hsu, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 51, 458–465 (1996).
16. C. Thomas, "Problems of Shear in Biotechnology," in Chemical Engineering Problems in Biotechnology, M. Winkler Ed, (Elsevier Science, 1990), pp. 25–93.
17. K. Brorson et al., Biotechnol. Bioeng.
82 (3), 321–329 (2003).
18. G. Miesegaes, S. Lute and K. Brorson, Biotechnol. Bioeng.
106 (2), 238–246 (2010).
19. G. Bolton, J. Basha. and D. LaCasse, Biotechnol. Prog.
26 (6), 1671–1677 (2010).
20. T. Hongo-Hirasaki, M. Komuro, and S. Ide, Biotechnol. Prog.
26 (4), 1080–1087 (2010).
21. G. Kern and Krishnan, BioPharm Int.
19 (10), 32–41 (2006).
|
