Literature DB >> 27350424

Validation Study of Rapid Assays of Bioburden, Endotoxins and Other Contamination.

Hideharu Shintani1.   

Abstract

Microbial testing performed in support of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical production falls into three main categories: detection (qualitative), enumeration (quantitative), and characterization/identification. Traditional microbiological methods are listed in the compendia and discussed by using the conventional growth-based techniques, which are labor intensive and time consuming. In general, such tests require several days of incubation for microbial contamination (bioburden) to be detected, and therefore management seldom is able to take proactive corrective measures. In addition, microbial growth is limited by the growth medium used and incubation conditions, thus impacting testing sensitivity, accuracy, and reproducibility.  For more than 20 years various technology platforms for rapid microbiological methods (RMM) have been developed, and many have been readily adopted by the food industry and clinical microbiology laboratories. Their use would certainly offer drug companies faster test turnaround times to accommodate the aggressive deadlines for manufacturing processes and product release. Some rapid methods also offer the possibility for real-time microbial analyses, enabling management to respond to microbial contamination events in a more timely fashion, and can provide cost savings and higher efficiencies in quality control testing laboratories. Despite the many proven business and quality benefits and the fact that the FDA's initiative to promote the use of process analytical technology (PAT) includes rapid microbial methods, pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industries have been somewhat slow to embrace alternative microbial methodologies for several reasons. The major reason is that the bioburden counts detected by the incubation method and rapid assay are greatly divergent.  The use of rapid methods is a dynamic field in applied microbiology and one that has gained increased attention nationally and internationally over time. This topic has been extensively addressed at conferences and in published documents around the world. More recently, the use of alternative methods for control of the microbiological quality of pharmaceutical products and materials used in pharmaceutical production has been addressed by the compendia in an attempt to facilitate implementation of these technologies by pharmaceutical companies. The author presents some of the rapid method technologies under evaluation or in use by pharmaceutical microbiologists and the current status of the implementation of alternative microbial methods.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27350424     DOI: 10.4265/bio.21.63

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biocontrol Sci        ISSN: 1342-4815            Impact factor:   0.982


  4 in total

Review 1.  Experimental procedures for decontamination and microbiological testing in cardiovascular tissue banks.

Authors:  Paula Hansen Suss; Victoria Stadler Tasca Ribeiro; Juliette Cieslinski; Letícia Kraft; Felipe Francisco Tuon
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2019-01-06

Review 2.  Essential Topics for the Regulatory Consideration of Phages as Clinically Valuable Therapeutic Agents: A Perspective from Spain.

Authors:  Roberto Vázquez; Roberto Díez-Martínez; Pilar Domingo-Calap; Pedro García; Diana Gutiérrez; Maite Muniesa; María Ruiz-Ruigómez; Rafael Sanjuán; María Tomás; María Ángeles Tormo-Mas; Pilar García
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2022-03-26

Review 3.  Robust Approaches for the Production of Active Ingredient and Drug Product for Human Phage Therapy.

Authors:  Michele Mutti; Lorenzo Corsini
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 5.640

4.  Raman spectra-based deep learning: A tool to identify microbial contamination.

Authors:  Murali K Maruthamuthu; Amir Hossein Raffiee; Denilson Mendes De Oliveira; Arezoo M Ardekani; Mohit S Verma
Journal:  Microbiologyopen       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 3.139

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.