| Literature DB >> 35268765 |
Adela Štimac1, Tihana Kurtović1, Nediljko Pavlović2, Beata Halassy1.
Abstract
Quality control of human immunoglobulin formulations produced by caprylic acid precipitation necessitates a simple, rapid, and accurate method for determination of residual caprylic acid. A high-performance liquid chromatography method for that purpose was developed and validated. The method involves depletion of immunoglobulins, the major interfering components that produce high background noise, by precipitation with acetonitrile (1:1, v/v). Chromatographic analysis of caprylic acid, preserved in supernatant with no loss, was performed using a reverse-phase C18 column (2.1 × 150 mm, 3 μm) as a stationary phase and water with 0.05% TFA-acetonitrile (50:50, v/v) as a mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min and run time of 10 min. The developed method was successfully validated according to the ICH guidelines. The validation parameters confirmed that method was linear, accurate, precise, specific, and able to provide excellent separation of peaks corresponding to caprylic acid and the fraction of remaining immunoglobulins. Furthermore, a 24-1 fractional factorial design was applied in order to test the robustness of developed method. As such, the method is highly suitable for the quantification of residual caprylic acid in formulations of human immunoglobulins for therapeutic use, as demonstrated on samples produced by fractionation of convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 human plasma at a laboratory scale. The obtained results confirmed that the method is convenient for routine quality control.Entities:
Keywords: caprylic acid; convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 human plasma; high-performance liquid chromatography method; human immunoglobulins; quality control; validation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35268765 PMCID: PMC8912018 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27051665
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Optimized chromatographic conditions.
| Parameter | Chromatographic Condition |
|---|---|
| Mobile phase | 0.05% TFA in water–ACN (50:50, |
| Flow rate | 0.2 mL/min |
| Mode | Isocratic |
| Run time | 10 min |
| Injection volume | 5 μL |
| Detection wavelength | 210 nm |
| Temperature | Ambient temperature |
Figure 1Monitoring of CA recovery in QC samples during diafiltration process by determination of its amount in filtrate, retentate, and filtrates that were obtained after three rinsing cycles with water.
Figure 2HPLC chromatograms of (a) caprylic acid and (b) QC samples (IVIG sample spiked with CA) after precipitation of IgGs by ACN. Chromatographic conditions are given in Table 1.
Results of analysis of variance (ANOVA) for linearity.
| df | Sum of Squares | Mean Square | F | Significance F * | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | 1 | 6.62 × 1012 | 6.62 × 1012 | 68,106.87 | 2.96 × 10−66 |
| Residual | 40 | 3.89 × 109 | 97,259,462 | ||
| Total | 41 | 6.63 × 1012 |
* Significance F is the p-value of F.
Precision (intra- and inter-day) and accuracy of the method for determination of CA concentration in IVIG samples.
| Nominal Amount of CA in ppm | Measured Amount of | % RSD | % Recovery | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intra-day precision a | ||||
| 1st day | 300 | 303.06 ± 1.74 | 0.575 | 101.02 ± 0.58 |
| 750 | 753.68 ± 5.30 | 0.703 | 100.49 ± 0.71 | |
| 1250 | 1249.33 ± 10.36 | 0.829 | 99.94 ± 0.83 | |
| 2nd day | 300 | 297.08 ± 1.09 | 0.669 | 99.03 ± 0.36 |
| 750 | 739.37 ± 3.93 | 0.671 | 98.58 ± 0.52 | |
| 1250 | 1243.27 ± 7.98 | 0.642 | 99.46 ± 0.64 | |
| 3rd day | 300 | 302.31 ± 2.56 | 0.848 | 100.77 ± 0.85 |
| 750 | 740.83 ± 3.38 | 0.457 | 98.78 ± 0.49 | |
| 1250 | 1252.12 ± 8.67 | 0.692 | 100.17 ± 0.69 | |
| Inter-day precision b | 300 | 301.04 ± 3.22 | 1.069 | 100.35 ± 1.07 |
| 750 | 744.39 ± 7.64 | 1.027 | 99.25 ± 1.02 | |
| 1250 | 1248.24 ± 9.32 | 0.746 | 99.86 ± 0.75 |
a n = 6 for each amount of CA. b n = 18 for each amount of CA (3 days × 6 samples).
LOD and LOQ values determined by S/N ratio and SD of the response (SD of a regression line or SD of the y-intercept) and slope of the calibration curves.
| S/N | SD of Regression Line * | SD of | |
|---|---|---|---|
| LOD | 8 ppm | 10.3 ± 1.1 ppm | 7.0 ± 0.7 ppm |
| LOQ | 25 ppm | 31.3 ± 3.4 ppm | 21.1 ± 2.2 ppm |
* Mean ± SD of calibration curves on three separate days.
Values (average ± standard deviation) of obtained responses for eight experiments of fractional factorial design (FFD).
| Experiment | RT | A | N | R | k’ | Tailing Factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12.30 ± 0.01 | 377.79 ± 5.43 | 5064 ± 54 | 18.38 ± 0.13 | 4.15 ± 0.01 | 1.197 ± 0.012 |
| 2 | 10.18 ± 0.05 | 312.55 ± 4.55 | 4632 ± 32 | 18.13 ± 0.02 | 4.21 ± 0.02 | 1.179 ± 0.005 |
| 3 | 10.17 ± 0.01 | 302.32 ± 4.26 | 4712 ± 30 | 17.88 ± 0.13 | 4.10 ± 0.01 | 1.176 ± 0.006 |
| 4 | 12.35 ± 0.03 | 369.27 ± 4.39 | 5115 ± 33 | 19.09 ± 0.04 | 4.27 ± 0.02 | 1.183 ± 0.005 |
| 5 | 6.03 ± 0.02 | 293.72 ± 2.93 | 2744 ± 24 | 10.64 ± 0.15 | 2.15 ± 0.01 | 1.222 ± 0.004 |
| 6 | 7.24 ± 0.01 | 358.67 ± 2.87 | 3029 ± 9 | 11.56 ± 0.07 | 2.17 ± 0.01 | 1.224 ± 0.002 |
| 7 | 7.23 ± 0.01 | 354.06 ± 2.57 | 3051 ± 4 | 11.06 ± 0.14 | 2.13 ± 0.01 | 1.234 ± 0.002 |
| 8 | 6.02 ± 0.01 | 292.91 ± 2.37 | 2732 ± 12 | 10.98 ± 0.04 | 2.16 ± 0.01 | 1.225 ± 0.004 |
Obtained simple effect (E) of a given factor on each of the monitored responses.
| Factor | E on RT | E on A | E on N | E on R | E on k’ | E on Tailing Factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 0.01317 | 1.3764 | −15.92 | 0.44417 * | 0.06942 | −0.0043 |
| Wavelength (nm) | 0.00383 | −6.0396 | 35.58 | 0.07483 | 0.00092 | −0.0010 |
| %ACN ( | −4.61700 * | −15.6454 * | −1991.75 * | −7.30983 * | −2.03008 * | 0.0425 * |
| Flow rate (mL/min) | −1.68467 * | −64.5738 * | −359.58 * | −0.61583 * | −0.02658 | −0.0088 |
* p < 0.05.
Figure 3Pareto charts of standardized effects of examined operating factors (%ACN, flow rate, pH, wavelength) on responses: (a) retention time; (b) peak area; (c) theoretical plate number; (d) resolution; (e) capacity factor; (f) tailing factor.
Figure 4CA removal monitoring during diafiltration step of the refinement protocol for IgG purification, performed by quantification of CA amount in crude IgG, filtrates after each diafiltration step, and final pure IgG.
Experimental factors and levels.
| Factors | Low Level | Nominal Level | High Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 2.2 | 2.4 | 2.6 |
| Wavelength (nm) | 208 | 210 | 212 |
| %ACN ( | 45 | 50 | 55 |
| Flow rate (mL/min) | 0.18 | 0.2 | 0.22 |
The total of eight experiments proposed by the software for FFD.
| Experiment Number | pH | Wavelength (nm) | %ACN ( | Flow Rate (mL/min) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.2 | 208 | 45 | 0.18 |
| 2 | 2.6 | 208 | 45 | 0.22 |
| 3 | 2.2 | 212 | 45 | 0.22 |
| 4 | 2.6 | 212 | 45 | 0.18 |
| 5 | 2.2 | 208 | 55 | 0.22 |
| 6 | 2.6 | 208 | 55 | 0.18 |
| 7 | 2.2 | 212 | 55 | 0.18 |
| 8 | 2.6 | 212 | 55 | 0.22 |