Literature DB >> 23618961

Impact of controlled ice nucleation on process performance and quality attributes of a lyophilized monoclonal antibody.

David Awotwe-Otoo1, Cyrus Agarabi, Erik K Read, Scott Lute, Kurt A Brorson, Mansoor A Khan, Rakhi B Shah.   

Abstract

An efficient and potentially scalable technology was evaluated to control the ice nucleation step of the freezing process for a model monoclonal antibody formulation and the effect on process performance and quality attributes of the final lyophilized product was compared with the conventional shelf ramping method of freezing. Controlled ice nucleation resulted in uniform nucleation at temperatures between -2.3 and -3.2 °C while uncontrolled nucleation resulted in random nucleation at temperatures between -10 and -16.4 °C. The sublimation rate (dm/dt) during primary drying was higher in the controlled nucleation cycle (0.13 g/h/vial) than in the uncontrolled nucleation cycle (0.11 g/h/vial). This was due to the formation of larger ice crystals, leading to lower product resistance (Rp) and 19% reduction in the primary drying for the controlled nucleation cycle. Controlled ice nucleation resulted in lyophilized cakes with more acceptable appearance, no visible collapse or shrinkage and decreased reconstitution times compared with uncontrolled nucleation. There were no observed differences in the particle size, concentration (A280 nm) and presence of aggregates (A410 nm) between the two nucleation cycles when the lyophilized cakes were reconstituted. These were confirmed by SEC and protein A-HPLC analyses which showed similar peak shapes and retention times between the two cycles. However, uncontrolled nucleation resulted in cakes with larger specific surface area (0.90 m(2)/g) than controlled nucleation (0.46 m(2)/g). SEM images of the lyophilized cakes from uncontrolled nucleation revealed a sponge-like morphology with smaller pores while cakes from controlled nucleation cycle revealed plate-like structures with more open and larger pores. While controlled nucleation resulted in a final product with a higher residual moisture content (2.1±0.08%) than uncontrolled nucleation (1.62±0.11%), this was resolved by increasing the secondary drying temperature. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23618961     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2013.04.041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Pharm        ISSN: 0378-5173            Impact factor:   5.875


  6 in total

1.  Studying the morphology of lyophilized protein solids using X-ray micro-CT: effect of post-freeze annealing and controlled nucleation.

Authors:  Ken-ichi Izutsu; Etsuo Yonemochi; Chikako Yomota; Yukihiro Goda; Haruhiro Okuda
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2014-05-31       Impact factor: 3.246

Review 2.  The Principles of Freeze-Drying and Application of Analytical Technologies.

Authors:  Kevin R Ward; Paul Matejtschuk
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

3.  Characterization of the physical stability of a lyophilized IgG1 mAb after accelerated shipping-like stress.

Authors:  Srivalli Telikepalli; Ozan S Kumru; Jae Hyun Kim; Sangeeta B Joshi; Kristin B O'Berry; Angela W Blake-Haskins; Melissa D Perkins; C Russell Middaugh; David B Volkin
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 3.534

Review 4.  Freeze-drying for the preservation of immunoengineering products.

Authors:  Nagavendra Kommineni; Arun Butreddy; Vaskuri G S Sainaga Jyothi; Pavimol Angsantikul
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2022-09-13

5.  Recommended Best Practices for Lyophilization Validation-2021 Part I: Process Design and Modeling.

Authors:  Feroz Jameel; Alina Alexeenko; Akhilesh Bhambhani; Gregory Sacha; Tong Zhu; Serguei Tchessalov; Lokesh Kumar; Puneet Sharma; Ehab Moussa; Lavanya Iyer; Rui Fang; Jayasree Srinivasan; Ted Tharp; Joseph Azzarella; Petr Kazarin; Mehfouz Jalal
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2021-08-18       Impact factor: 3.246

6.  Process and Formulation Effects on Protein Structure in Lyophilized Solids Using Mass Spectrometric Methods.

Authors:  Lavanya K Iyer; Gregory A Sacha; Balakrishnan S Moorthy; Steven L Nail; Elizabeth M Topp
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 3.534

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.