The impact of technical failures during cultivation of an inclusion body process.
Downstream process
Escherichia coli
Inclusion body
Technical failure
Upstream process
Journal
Bioprocess and biosystems engineering
ISSN: 1615-7605
Titre abrégé: Bioprocess Biosyst Eng
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101088505
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
15
04
2019
accepted:
04
06
2019
pubmed:
4
7
2019
medline:
6
2
2020
entrez:
4
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In biotechnological processes, technical failures in the upstream process often lead to batch loss. It is of great interest to investigate the empirical impact of technical failures to understand and mitigate their impact accurately and reduce economic damage. We investigated the impact in the upstream and downstream of a recombinant antibody fragment inclusion body production process chain to provide integrated empirical data and knowledge. First, we provided a reproducible process chain that yielded high inclusion body content, high specific product titer, and a refolding yield of 30%. The inclusion body downstream proved to be of high reproducibility. Through the intended introduction of technical failures, we were not only able to shed more light on the empirical responses in the upstream and downstream, but also on process-boosting parameters that would have been neglected. Herein, a short increase in temperature during the cultivation clearly increased the refolding yield.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31267174
doi: 10.1007/s00449-019-02158-x
pii: 10.1007/s00449-019-02158-x
pmc: PMC6751153
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal
0
Recombinant Proteins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1611-1624Références
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997 Jun;63(6):2355-60
pubmed: 9172355
Nat Biotechnol. 2009 Jan;27(1):26-34
pubmed: 19131992
Eng Life Sci. 2017 Feb 01;17(6):598-604
pubmed: 32624805
Biotechnol Bioeng. 2000 Jul 20;69(2):119-28
pubmed: 10861391
Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2018 Feb;38(1):106-121
pubmed: 28423945
Biotechnol Bioeng. 1999 Oct 5;65(1):54-64
pubmed: 10440671
Adv Appl Microbiol. 2007;62:105-35
pubmed: 17869604
Pharm Dev Technol. 2015;20(5):513-27
pubmed: 24641280
Biotechnol Bioeng. 2005 Feb 20;89(4):453-63
pubmed: 15609273
Biotechnol Lett. 2003 Sep;25(17):1385-95
pubmed: 14514038
Trends Biotechnol. 2009 Sep;27(9):546-53
pubmed: 19647883
Bioprocess Biosyst Eng. 2008 Jan;31(1):21-39
pubmed: 17917745
Microb Cell Fact. 2017 Aug 1;16(1):134
pubmed: 28764719
FEBS Lett. 2006 Nov 27;580(27):6471-6
pubmed: 17101131
Biochem Res Int. 2011;2011:631607
pubmed: 21822494
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1991 Jun;57(6):1669-74
pubmed: 1908208
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1998 May;64(5):1773-9
pubmed: 9572950
Microorganisms. 2018 Nov 25;6(4):
pubmed: 30477255
BMC Biotechnol. 2018 May 29;18(1):30
pubmed: 29843684
Biophys J. 2004 Jun;86(6):3836-45
pubmed: 15189880
Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010 Sep;398(1):137-54
pubmed: 20480150
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1990 Apr;56(4):1004-11
pubmed: 2187400
Microb Cell Fact. 2018 Sep 20;17(1):148
pubmed: 30236107
Biotechnol Appl Biochem. 2008 Apr;49(Pt 4):239-46
pubmed: 17708747
Microb Cell Fact. 2019 Jan 14;18(1):5
pubmed: 30642336
Pharm Res. 2017 Dec;34(12):2596-2613
pubmed: 29168076
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2018 Jan;102(2):667-676
pubmed: 29159587
Trends Biotechnol. 2012 Feb;30(2):65-70
pubmed: 22037492
Biotechnol Prog. 1999 Jan-Feb;15(1):81-90
pubmed: 9933517
Methods Mol Biol. 2011;705:195-209
pubmed: 21125387
Biotechnol J. 2017 Jul;12(7):
pubmed: 28120503
Methods Mol Biol. 2015;1258:283-91
pubmed: 25447870
mBio. 2017 Oct 31;8(5):
pubmed: 29089432