Considerations in Outsourced Vaccine Manufacturing

Marco Chacón of Paragon Bioservices discusses the challenges associated with outsourced vaccine manufacturing. This article is part of a special section on vaccines.
Oct 01, 2012
Volume 25, Issue 10

Marco Chacón
For a CMO, vaccine manufacturing requires the capability to produce a diverse set of products at different scales for multiple clients. BioPharm International spoke with Marco Chacon, president and CEO of Paragon Bioservices, about the challenges associated with outsourced vaccine manufacturing. Paragon Bioservices is a midsized CMO with expertise in vaccine manufacturing, including the production of of virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines.

BioPharm: What are Paragon's capabilities with regards to vaccines?

Chacón: The types of vaccines we produce can be viral or bacterial antigens of one sort or another. As long as they are recombinantly produced, the nature of the protein doesn't matter. We can do both nonclinical and GMP manufacturing in several systems, including bacterial, yeast, mammalian, and insect cells at volumes up to 500 L in mammalian or insect cells, and up to 300 L for microbial systems. Over the past several years, we have put together a number of capabilities. We have found that in addition to having the right manufacturing tools, one also has to have the right analytics, and at the tail end, the quality teams such that the material is produced while observing all the regulations.

BioPharm: Are there any challenges that differentiate vaccine manufacture from the manufacture of other classes of proteins?

Chacón: If the vaccine that you're producing falls into the category of recombinant protein expression, such as VLP-type vaccines, the only challenge is to assemble those particles correctly and purify them. On the whole, a company that is capable of doing recombinant protein expression and purification ought to be able to do the same with VLP-type vaccines.

The difference is more significant when you're making whole-cell or whole-virus vaccines, when the safety classification of the organisms must be considered. A company may have [biosafety level] BSL 2 capabilities, but not BSL 3.

BioPharm: To what extent do you use quality-by-design (QbD) principles in your processes?

Chacón: QbD is something newer to us, but it's something that we have embraced, and we're building more systems so that we can execute our projects and deliver on that level. We have recently been awarded a large government contract, and the sponsoring agency requires that we adopt QbD principles in the execution of this contract.

BioPharm: When comparing clients with whom you have previously done development work versus those that come to you just for manufacturing, is there a difference in how you approach technology transfer/process development under the two circumstances?

Chacón: For those projects in which we have been with the client from making research-grade vaccine targets, by the time it goes to the GMP suite we know that process inside and out. But it doesn't mean we can't work well with a reasonably sophisticated client that reaches out to us at a later stage, let's just say, right before they want to manufacture, or make a toxicology lot. We have requirements in place that compel that client to provide us with all pertinent information, thus making the tech transfer process the best it can be. We will characterize any original reagents, cell banks, and the like according to the requirements put in place by our Quality unit, and there there should be no significant problems.

Occasionally, we may get a project that is grossly undefined, or where the expectation of the client may be a bit too unrealistic. But as long as we have requirements that we stick by in terms of accepting a project, more often than not those problems can be avoided.

lorem ipsum