| Literature DB >> 23884181 |
Sanchayita Ghose1, Yinying Tao, Lynn Conley, Douglas Cecchini.
Abstract
Hydrophobic interaction chromatography (HIC) is commonly used as a polishing step in monoclonal antibody purification processes. HIC offers an orthogonal selectivity to ion exchange chromatography and can be an effective step for aggregate clearance and host cell protein reduction. HIC, however, suffers from the limitation of use of high concentrations of kosmotropic salts to achieve the desired separation. These salts often pose a disposal concern in manufacturing facilities and at times can cause precipitation of the product. Here, we report an unconventional way of operating HIC in the flowthrough (FT) mode with no kosmotropic salt in the mobile phase. A very hydrophobic resin is selected as the stationary phase and the pH of the mobile phase is modulated to achieve the required selectivity. Under the pH conditions tested (pH 6.0 and below), antibodies typically become positively charged, which has an effect on its polarity and overall surface hydrophobicity. Optimum pH conditions were chosen under which the antibody product of interest flowed through while impurities such as aggregates and host cell proteins bound to the column. This strategy was tested with a panel of antibodies with varying pI and surface hydrophobicity. Performance was comparable to that observed using conventional HIC conditions with high salt.Entities:
Keywords: HIC; aggregates; flowthrough; monoclonal antibodies; no salt
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23884181 PMCID: PMC3851231 DOI: 10.4161/mabs.25552
Source DB: PubMed Journal: MAbs ISSN: 1942-0862 Impact factor: 5.857
Table 1. Ammonium sulfate concentrations used in the control HIC (Phenyl Sepharose) FT processes and corresponding dilutions with concentrated salt solution required to achieve the required ammonium sulfate concentration
| Molecule | Ammonium sulfate concentration needed in the existing HIC process | % Dilution needed to achieve the needed salt concentration |
|---|---|---|
| A | 200 mM | 14 |
| B | 650 mM | 33 |
| C | 220 mM | 26 |
| D | Control HIC process did not exist | |

Figure 1. Linear retention of lysozyme on 7 commercially available HIC resins in a decreasing ammonium sulfate gradient.

Figure 2. Linear retention of mAbs A-D on Hexyl Toyopearl in a decreasing pH gradient.
Table 2. Elution pH at peak maxima in a decreasing pH gradient on Hexyl Toyopearl data
| Molecule | pH at peak maxima |
|---|---|
| A | 5.5 |
| B | 6.0 |
| C | 5.6 |
| D | 6.0 |
Elution pH of 6.0 implies the antibody was un-retained in the gradient

Figure 3. Representative chromatogram for the no-salt HIC FT step.
Table 3. Process performance comparison between high-salt and no-salt HIC FT step for each antibody
| mAb | Loading | HIC | Mobile phase composition | Mobile phase cond | Step Yield | Product Quality in FT pool | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | | Load – Eluate from the first polishing step | 0.8 | 10 | ||||
| 35 | Control | 200 mM AmSO4 in | 39 | 85 | 0.33 | < 3 | ||
| No salt | 10 mM sodium citrate | 2.6 | 86 | 0.21 | 3.8 | |||
| B | | Load – Eluate from the first polishing step | 0.7 | 25 | ||||
| 65 | Control | 650 mM AmSO4 in | 95 | 78 | 0.10 | 4.8 | ||
| No salt | 5 mM sodium citrate, pH 6.0 | 1.3 | 88 | 0.13 | 4.7 | |||
| C* | | Load – Eluate from capture step | 2.5 | 100 | ||||
| 70 | Control | 220 mM AmSO4 in | 38 | 86 | 0.31 | 38 | ||
| No salt | 10 mM sodium citrate | 2.6 | 88 | 0.34 | 23 | |||
| D | | Load – Eluate from the first polishing step | 2.2 | 10 | ||||
| 55 | Control** | - | | - | - | - | ||
| No salt | 10 mM sodium citrate | 2.6 | 90 | 0.37 | < 1.4 | |||
HIC used as the 2nd polishing step for mAb A, B, D and as the 1st polishing step for mAb C; ** Control HIC process did not exist for mAb D, only the new low salt HIC step was developed. Abbreviations: AmSO4, ammonium sulfate; FT, flowthrough; HCP, host cell protein; HMW, high molecular weight; cond, conductivity

Figure 4. Elution salt concentration of mAb B and D on a decreasing ammonium sulfate gradient using Phenyl Toyopearl resin (Lower elution salt concentration implies greater hydrophobicity).

Figure 5. Effect of column loading on the performance of the no-salt HIC FT step.
Table 4. Resin lot-to-lot variability study
| Step yield | HMW | HCP level | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Load material | - | 0.6 | 11 |
| Resin Lot 65HECB501H | 93 | 0.28 | 0.8 |
| Resin Lot 65HECB01P | 92 | 0.26 | 0.8 |
| Resin Lot 65HECB501N | 95 | 0.26 | 1.4 |