Division of Monoclonal Antibody Products,Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Health for Research on Quality and Standardization of Biotech Product, National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, Beijing 100050,China
OBJECTIVE To explore the application value of microflow digital imaging (MDI) in sub-visible particle detection of monoclonal antibodies(mAbs). METHODS Polystyrene latex particles were adopted as standard particles to evaluate the stability and accuracy of MDI, then MDI was used to detect the quantities and compositions of sub-visible particles with diameters of ≥10 μm and ≥25 μm in two groups of mAbs. One group containing three mAbs from different companies against EGFR was selected to show the compositional difference of sub-visible particles. Another group was set to evaluate the impact of storage conditions on stability of sub-visible particles in mAb against TNF-α. The storage conditions included 4 ��,37 �� and exposure under light of 6 000 lx. RESULTS Using polystyrene latex particles, MDI method showed acceptable stability and accuracy. The analysis showed that the numbers of sub-visible particles in mAbs from Company 1 and Company 2 were comparable, but their main compositions were non-protein and protein particles separately. The number of sub-visible particles in mAb from Company 3 was much higher than that of Company 1 and Company 2 and the sub-visible particles included both non-protein and protein particles, indicating differed strategies should be adopted to control sub-visible particles. It was also found that the selected antibody against TNF-α was much more unstable when stored at 37 �� or exposed under light of 6 000 lx as the quantities of protein particles were increased dramatically, which suggested the obvious impact of storage conditions on stability of protein in mAbs. CONCLUSION MDI can provide not only diameters and the quantities of sub-visible particles, but also morphological information and tell the nature of the particles. These functions are powerful tools for sub-visible particle control and quality evaluation of mAbs.
CARPENTER J F,RANDOLPH T W,JISKOOT W,et al. Overlooking subvisible particles in therapeutic protein products: gaps that may compromise product quality[J]. J Pharm Sci,2009,98(4):1201-1205.
[2]
RATANJI K D,DERRICK J P,DEARMAN R J,et al. Immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: influence of aggregation[J]. J Immunotoxicol,2014,11(2):99-109.
[3]
ROMBACH-RIEGRAF V,KARLE A C,WOLF B,et al.Aggregation of human recombinant monoclonal antibodies influences the capacity of dendritic cells to stimulate adaptive T-cell responses in vitro[J]. PloS One, 2014,9(1):e86322.
[4]
GERHARDT A,MCGRAW N R,SCHWARTZ D K,et al. Protein aggregation and particle formation in prefilled glass syringes[J]. J Pharm Sci,2014,103(6):1601-1612.
[5]
GERHARDT A,MCUMBER A C,NGUYEN B H,et al. Surfactant effects on particle generation in antibody formulations in pre-filled syringes[J]. J Pharm Sci,2015,104(12):4056-4064.
[6]
NARHI L O,SCHMIT J,BECHTOLD-PETERS K,et al. Classification of protein aggregates[J]. J Pharm Sci,2012,101(2):493-498.
[7]
RANDOLPH T W,SCHILTZ E,SEDERSTROM D,et al. Do not drop: mechanical shock in vials causes cavitation,protein aggregation,and particle formation[J]. J Pharm Sci,2015,104(2):602-611.
[8]
VAN BEERS M M,GILLI F,SCHELLEKENS H,et al. Immunogenicity of recombinant human interferon beta interacting with particles of glass, metal, and polystyrene[J]. J Pharm Sci, 2012,101(1):187-199.
[9]
SACHA G A, SAFFELL-CLEMMER W, ABRAM K,et al. Practical fundamentals of glass, rubber, and plastic sterile packaging systems[J]. Pharm Dev Technol, 2010,15(1):6-34.
[10]
DAS T K. Protein particulate detection issues in biotherapeutics development--current status[J]. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech, 2012,13(2):732-746.
[11]
FRAHM G E, POCHOPSKY A W, CLARKE T M,et al. Evaluation of microflow digital imaging particle analysis for sub-visible particles formulated with an opaque vaccine adjuvant[J]. PLoS One, 2016,11(2):e0150229.
[12]
NARHI L O, JIANG Y, CAO S,et al. A critical review of analytical methods for subvisible and visible particles[J]. Curr Pharm Biotechnol, 2009,10(4):373-381.
[13]
SHARMA D K, KING D, OMA P,et al. Micro-flow imaging: flow microscopy applied to sub-visible particulate analysis in protein formulations[J]. AAPS J, 2010,12(3):455-464.
[14]
ZOLLS S, WEINBUCH D, WIGGENHORN M,et al. Flow imaging microscopy for protein particle analysis--a comparative evaluation of four different analytical instruments[J]. AAPS J, 2013,15(4):1200-1211.
[15]
PANCHAL J, KOTAREK J, MARSZAL E,et al. Analyzing subvisible particles in protein drug products: a comparison of dynamic light scattering (Dls) and resonant mass measurement (Rmm)[J]. AAPS J, 2014,16(3):440-451.
[16]
STREHL R, ROMBACH-RIEGRAF V, DIEZ M,et al. Discrimination between silicone oil droplets and protein aggregates in biopharmaceuticals: a novel multiparametric image filter for sub-visible particles in microflow imaging analysis[J]. Pharm Res, 2012,29(2):594-602.
[17]
LEVIN I, ZIGMAN S, KOMLOSH A,et al. Development of flow imaging analysis for subvisible particle characterization in glatiramer acetate[J]. J Pharm Sci, 2015, 104(11):3977-3983.
[18]
FREITAG A J, SHOMALI M, MICHALAKIS S,et al. Investigation of the immunogenicity of different types of aggregates of a murine monoclonal antibody in mice[J]. Pharm Res, 2015,32(2):430-444.
[19]
NARHI L O, CORVARI V, RIPPLE D C,et al. Subvisible (2-100 ��m) particle analysis during biotherapeutic drug product development: part 1, considerations and strategy[J]. J Pharm Sci, 2015,104(6):1899-1908.
2018, Vol. 53 
