4.6 Article

CHO Gene Expression Profiling in Biopharmaceutical Process Analysis and Design

Journal

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOENGINEERING
Volume 105, Issue 2, Pages 431-438

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bit.22549

Keywords

CHO; mammalian cell culture; biopharmaceuticals; gene expression profiling; rational medium design; process analysis and design

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Increase in both productivity and product yields in biopharmaceutical process development with recombinant protein producing mammalian cells can be mainly attributed to the advancements in cell line development, media, and process optimization. Only recently, genome-scale technologies enable a system-level analysis to elucidate the complex biomolecular basis of protein production in mammalian cells promising an increased process understanding and the deduction of knowledge-based approaches for further process optimization. Here, the use Of gene expression Profiling for the analysis of a low titer (LT) and high titer (HT) fed batch process using the same IgG producing CHO cell line was investigated. We found that gene expression (i) significantly differed in HT versus LT process conditions due to differences in applied chemically defined, serum-free media, (ii) changed over the time Course Of the fed batch processes, and that (iii) both metabolic pathways and 14 biological functions such as cellular growth or cell death were affected. Furthermore, detailed analysis of metabolism in a standard process format revealed the potential use of transcriptomics for rational media design as is shown for the case of lipid metabolism where the product titer could be increased by about 20% based on a lipid modified basal medium. The results demonstrate that gene expression Profiling can be an important tool for mammalian biopharmaceutical process analysis and optimization. Biotechnol. Bicieng. 2010;105: 431-438. (C) 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available