| Literature DB >> 26090618 |
Tracy Tay1, Catherine Agius, Ross Hamilton, Jesse Bodle, Steve Rockman.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to explore various testing methodologies suitable for characterizing sedimented or agglomerated material. To model this, bioCSL's split influenza virus vaccine, Fluvax® was utilized. The investigation was conducted on 5 dispensed lots of commercially manufactured vaccine, formulated for the 2013 Southern Hemisphere season. Vaccine syringes were initially inspected by visual tests; the material was then aseptically pooled for characterization assessment by microscopy and several agglomeration assays. All syringes passed bioCSL's description test where any fine or large sized particles of sediment observed in the vaccine were resuspended upon shaking; inverted light microscopy verified that the sediment morphology was consistent with influenza vaccine. Electron microscopic examination of pooled vaccine material demonstrated the presence of typical influenza structures including split virus, virosomes, whole virus particles and agglomerates. An optical density turbidity assay revealed relatively high protein recoveries in the vaccine supernatant post-centrifugation treatment, thus indicative of a well-dispersed vaccine formulation. This was corroborated by particle sizing analysis using dynamic light scattering which generated reproducible volume particle size distributions of a polydisperse nature. Ultraviolet-visible absorbance profiles further confirmed the presence of some agglomerated material. Data from all methods demonstrated consistent results between all batches of vaccine. Therefore, this investigation revealed the suitability and usefulness of the various methodologies in characterizing the appearance of agglomerated vaccine material. It is suggested that such methods may be applicable and beneficial for the development of a wider spectrum of heterogeneous and agglomerated formulations to provide safe, efficacious and superior quality biopharmaceutical products.Entities:
Keywords: AI, Agglomeration index; ANOVA, Analysis of variance; AUC, Analytical ultracentrifugation; DLS, Dynamic light scattering; EM, Electron microscopy; EP, European Pharmacopoeia; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; FFF, Field flow fractionation; HA, Hemagglutinin; ILM, Inverted light microscopy; IVV, Influenza virus vaccine; NA, Neuraminidase; OD, Optical density; ODT, Optical density turbidity; PSD, Particle size distribution; QbD, Quality by Design; RCF, Relative centrifugal force; RI, Refractive index; SEC, Size exclusion chromatography; SH, Southern Hemisphere; SLS, Static light scattering; TEM, Transmission electron microscope; TGA, Therapeutic Goods Administration; TIV, Trivalent influenza vaccine; UV, Ultraviolet; biopharmaceuticals; characterization methods; dispersed formulation; influenza vaccine; protein agglomeration; sedimentation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26090618 PMCID: PMC4514297 DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2015.1034914
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother ISSN: 2164-5515 Impact factor: 3.452
Details of examined lots of bioCSL's IVV for the 2013 SH season
| Lot no. | No. of syringes |
|---|---|
| 090634903 | 18 |
| 090635001 | 18 |
| 090636401 | 18 |
| 090637301 | 18 |
| 090638202 | 18 |
Results of description test and additional comments for 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV (18 syringes per lot, 90 syringes in total)
| IVV lot no. | Description test | Comments test |
|---|---|---|
| 090634903 | 18 out of 18 PASS | All syringes were identified to contain |
| 090636401 | 18 out of 18 PASS | |
| 090638202 | 18 out of 18 PASS | |
| 090637301 | 18 out of 18 PASS | From each lot, 15 syringes were identified to contain |
| 090635001 | 18 out of 18 PASS |
Figure 1.Representative ILM images for 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV, including lots 090634903, 090635001, 090636401, 090637301 and 090638202, when syringes were left unshaken (left column) and following vigorous shaking (right column).
Summary of ILM results for the appearance of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV
| Lot no. | No. of syringes | Unshaken (US) / Shaken (S) | Observations: morphology of sediment, if present, is consistent with that of influenza vaccine? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 090634903 | 15 | US | YES |
| S | YES | ||
| 090635001 | 15 | US | YES |
| S | YES | ||
| 090636401 | 15 | US | YES |
| S | YES | ||
| 090637301 | 15 | US | YES |
| S | YES | ||
| 090638202 | 15 | US | YES |
| S | YES |
Figure 2.Representative EM images for pooled material corresponding to each of the 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV at a magnification of 108,500x for lots (A) 090634903, (B) 090635001, (C) 090636401, (D) 090637301 and (E) 090638202; and at a magnification of 32,200x for lot (F) 090638202.
Figure 3.Average protein recovery in supernatant (expressed as %ODT) for 5 pooled groups within each of 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV, including lots (A) 090634903, (B) 090635001, (C) 090636401, (D) 090637301 and (E) 090638202, by ODT analysis post-centrifugation at an RCF of 13,684 g for 1 min.
Density, viscosity and refractive index (RI) properties of pooled 2013 SH IVV for DLS analysis at 25°C
| Pooled 2013 SH IVV | |
|---|---|
| Density (g/cm3) | 1.003 |
| Viscosity (cP) | 0.923 |
| RI | 1.3342 |
Figure 4.Average intensity PSDs (n = 5) of the supernatant for 5 pooled groups within each of 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV, including lots (A) 090634903, (B) 090635001, (C) 090636401, (D) 090637301 and (E) 090638202, by DLS analysis at 25°C post-centrifugation at an RCF of 6,082 g for 1 min.
Figure 5.Average volume PSDs (n = 5) of the supernatant for 5 pooled groups within each of 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV, including lots (A) 090634903, (B) 090635001, (C) 090636401, (D) 090637301 and (E) 090638202, by DLS analysis at 25°C post-centrifugation at an RCF of 6,082 g for 1 min.
Figure 6.Average UV-visible absorbance (AU) vs. wavelength (nm) profiles for 5 lots of bioCSL's 2013 SH IVV, including lots (A) 090634903, (B) 090635001, (C) 090636401, (D) 090637301 and (E) 090638202, performed neat for each lot (n = 3).
Agglomeration index (AI;%) for 5 lots of 2013 SH IVV, determined from UV-visible absorbance spectroscopy analysis
| 2013 SH IVV Lot no. | Average A280 | Average A350 | AI (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 090634903 | 0.430 | 0.136 | 46.2 |
| 090635001 | 0.430 | 0.135 | 45.6 |
| 090636401 | 0.479 | 0.155 | 47.6 |
| 090637301 | 0.444 | 0.142 | 46.9 |
| 090638202 | 0.415 | 0.138 | 49.6 |
Example ODT analysis for IVV
| Initial A280 (mg/ml) [A] | Supernatant post-centrifugation A280 (Sample 1) (mg/ml) [B] | Supernatant post-centrifugation A280 (Sample 2) (mg/ml) [C] | % Recovery (Sample 1) [D] | % Recovery (Sample 2) [E] | Average % Recovery [F] | Standard Deviation (stdev) of % Recovery (±) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description of analysis | A280 of neat sample (2 replicates) | A280 of supernatant after centrifugation (2 replicates) | A280 of supernatant after centrifugation (2 replicates) | = B / A * 100 | = C / A * 100 | = (D + E) / 2 * 100 | = stdev (D and E) |
| Example IVV | Avg A280 (0.61, 0.59) = 0.60 | Avg A280 (0.36, 0.35) = 0.36 | Avg A280 (0.36, 0.33) = 0.35 | 59.2 | 57.5 | 58.3 | 1.18 |