Designing Robust Virus Filtration Processes to Maximize ... · Virus filtration Virus filtration 2 bar 50 L/m 2 0 bar IgG concentration: 10 mg/mL Virus titer in the protein solution:

www.ak-bio.com

Designing Robust Virus Filtration Processes to Maximize Operational Flexibility While Achieving Small Virus Removal

Daniel Strauss, PhDSenior ScientistAsahi Kasei Bioprocess [email protected]

BPI West 2017March 2nd, 2017San Francisco, CA

Definition of Robustness

2

� Property of being strong and healthy inconstitution

� For a system: ability of toleratingperturbations that might affect thesystem’s functional body

� For an object: sturdy in construction

� For a system: able to withstand or overcome “adverse conditions ”

1) Robustness & Virus Removal

2) Robustness & Filtration Flux/Capacity

3) Robustness & Nanofilter Quality

Content

3

Planova Nanofilters

4

Planova TM 20N Planova TM BioEX

� Parvovirus removal nanofilters� Launched respectively in 2001 and 2009� Size exclusion mechanism and “multi-layer” filtration

1) Robustness & Virus Removal

Content

5

Robustness & Virus Removal

6

� Goal: tolerating perturbations to keep LRV > 4 log

� “Perturbations” : concentration, pH, conductivity, clogging/fouling, process pause


7

Impact of Protein Concentration:

Tomoko Hongo-Hirasaki, Asahi Kasei Medical, 2011 PDA Conference

Virus safety assured even if change of conc. during processdevelopment (phase I/III) ➔ process optimizations possible !

� Increase of concentration ➔Decrease of flux

� Increase of mass throughput up to a certain point

� No impact on PPV LRV (> 4 log)


8

Impact of pH :

Virus safety assured even if change of pH during processdevelopment (phase I/III) ➔ process optimizations possible !

� Impact on flux




9

Impact of Ionic Strength:


� Impact on flux

Virus safety assured even if change of cond. during processdevelopment (phase I/III) ➔ process optimizations possible !



10

Impact of Clogging/Fouling on Planova TM BioEX:

Theory: smaller pores clog first➔ virus passage increases with clogging

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 6 12 18 24

▲F

lux

deca

y (%

)

●F

lux;

3%

h-I

gG (L

/m2/

hr)

Filtration time (hour)

0123456

0 20 40 60 80 100Flux decay (%)

PP

V L

RV

(fr

actio

n)

Virus safety assured even if unexpected production problemleading to big flux decay (nevertheless deviation must beaddressed…)

Koichiro Yanagida, Asahi Kasei Medical, 2009 Planova Workshop – adapted

No impact on PPV LRV (> 4 log)

� Plasma-derived IgG on Planova 20N

� 20 hour process pause duration

Complete PPV clearance is achieved even at 20 h of pause

Pause20 h

Pre

ssur

e

0.8 bar100 L/m2

Virusfiltration

Bufferchase

0.8 bar30 L/m2

0 bar

IgG concentration: 10 mg/mL

Virus titer in theprotein solution:

6.2- 6.3 log10 TCID50/mL

Solution pH & NaCl Concentration


� Plasma-derived IgG on Planova 20N

� Process pause at low pH, high ionic strength

• Pool LRV > 4 is maintained even at 20 h of pause

• Minimizing pause duration minimizes the impact

Pause

Pre

ssur

e

0.8 bar100 L/m2

Virusfiltration

Bufferchase

0.8 bar30 L/m2

0 bar


Virus titer in theprotein solution: 6.4 - 6.7 log10 TCID50/mL

Solution condition: pH 4, 100 mM NaCl


Complete PPV clearance is observed under all condition s

Solution pH & NaCl Concentration

Pause3 h

Pre

ssur

e

2 bar100 L/m2

Virusfiltration

Virusfiltration

2 bar50 L/m2

0 bar


Virus titer in theprotein solution:

6.0- 6.4 log10 TCID50/mL

Robustness & Virus Removal� Plasma-derived IgG on Planova BioEX

� Process pause at low pH, high ionic strength

The impact of process pause is dependent on the amo unt of virus challenge used during the spiking study

2015 Planova Workshop, Tomoko Hongo-Hirasaki, et al. (adapted)

Planova™ 20N filterProtein Concentration: 10 mg/mL h-IgGSolution Conditions: pH 7, 100 mM NaClVirus Spike: 5.1, 6.4, 7.0 log10TCID50/mL


2) Robustness & Filtration Flux/Capacity

Content

15

16

Robustness & Flux/Capacity

� Goal: tolerating perturbations to keep

• Small Flux decay or High Vmax

• Consistent Flux (L/m2/h) or Filtration Capacity (L/m2)

� Main “perturbations” : protein, concentration, virusspiking

17


Impact of Protein:

Josh Goldstein, Janssen, 2014 Planova Workshop conference

� Similar levels of flux for the 3 mAbs� Consistent flux with no or small decay� Ideal for platform or multi-product plant� Same trend for PlanovaTM BioEX

Mabs with different pI tested with different pH & Conductivities

18


Impact of Concentration:

� Impact of concentration on flux/capacity

� But only ~ 30% flux decrease while concentration x 2 for 10-20 g/L

Planova filters can be considered robust against concentra tionincrease up to a certain point

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

0 10 20 30 40 50

h-IgG concentration (mg/mL)(100 mM NaCl, pH 4.5)

Filt

ratio

n C

apac

ity (

L/m

2 /3h

)

BioEX (294 kPa)

20N (78 kPa)

19



� Optimal concentration to get the maximum mass throughput (kg or g /m2)

� Case by case !

20



10 kg IgG nanofiltration:

� 10 mg/mL: - 20N: 1.5 kg/m2

➔ 6.7 m2

- BioEX: 3.5 kg/m2

➔ 2.9 m2

� 30 mg/mL: - 20N: 2.5 kg/m2

➔ 4 m2

- BioEX: 6.5 kg/m2

➔ 1.5 m2

Increase of protein mass throughput (g/m 2):➔ smaller filtration surface ➔ more cost effective

21


Impact of Virus Spiking:

� Trend of most of the nanofilters on the market

� Oversizing of filtration surface area

� What about Planova filters?

22


Impact of Virus Spiking:

20N

1 g/L h-IgG

50 mM Acetate, 100mM

NaCl, pH 5

Pressure: 14.2 psi

BioEX

3 g/L h-IgG

50 mM Acetate, 100mM NaCl,

pH 5

Pressure: 47 psi

Preparation of Ultra 1, 2, 3 and experiments conducted at Wuxi AppTecInc.

� No impact of virus spiking material on flux� Consistent flux with small decay� No oversizing of the nanofilter !

3) Robustness & Nanofilter Quality

Content

23

Robustness & Nanofilter Quality

24

The last 2 important questions:

� Is the Robustness kept during Process Scale-up ?

� Is the Robustness kept from one Nanofilter Lot toanother nanofilter lot ?


25

Brian Buesing, Asahi Kasei Bioprocess, 2015 Planova Workshop conference

20N and BioEX

3.40 bar (49.7 PSI)


26


27

Brian Buesing, Asahi Kasei Bioprocess, 2015 Planova Workshop.

Consistent flux observed at all scales and no lot t o lot variability


28

Brian Buesing, Asahi Kasei Bioprocess, 2015 Planova Workshop.

and lots


29

Daniel Strauss, Asahi Kasei Bioprocess, 2016 Planova Workshop.

Consistent flux observed at all scales and no lot t o lot variability


30

Daniel Strauss, Asahi Kasei Bioprocess, 2016 Planova Workshop.

Robust Viral Clearance across all filter sizes and l ots

31

1) Process Development:� Possibility to change conditions (buffer, concentration, pH, cond.)

to optimize nanofiltration or other purification steps

� Or faster development w/o optimizations because “it simply works”

2) Virus Clearance Validation:� High LRV achievable

� No oversizing of the nanofilter

3) Manufacturing & Commercial Production:� Process pause manageable

� Virus safety ensured despite accidents or purification problems

� Multi-product platform approach

� Slight production deviations absorbable

� Reliable performances

Conclusion - Concrete Benefits

Acknowledgements

32

Thank you to my colleagues in Japan, US and Europe !

33

どうもありがとう

Domo Arigato!

(thank you very much)

Questions ??

Documents

Designing Robust Virus Filtration Processes to Maximize ... · Virus filtration Virus filtration 2 bar 50 L/m 2 0 bar IgG concentration: 10 mg/mL Virus titer in the protein solution: