Disposable Bioprocessing Systems

Because of many misconceptions, the biological drug manufacturing industry does not fully utilize disposable components, despite their wide availability. These misconceptions include concerns for the quality of materials, running costs, scalability, the level of automation possible, and the training of staff needed to include these components in existing bioprocessing systems. Not fully realizing the long-term benefits, many manufacturers are unwilling to discard investments made in fixed equipment and traditional stainless steel systems. Regulatory and environmental concerns, however, will eventually compel manufacturers to adopt disposable systems. Making a strong case for disposables, Disposable Bioprocessing Systems demonstrates the true potential of these systems. Written by a researcher and professor with hands-on experience in designing, establishing, and validating biological manufacturing facilities worldwide, and creating model facilities using maximum disposable technology, this book is the first comprehensive introduction to understanding disposable systems. It gives an overview of the current state of the disposable bioprocessing industry, resolves all controversial issues, and guides readers in choosing disposable components that meet their needs. An important chapter on safety addresses facts and myths about the use of plastics and elastomers—including the issue of leaching—and how to ensure regulatory compliance. Helping readers understand their choices, the book describes the equipment and systems available to prepare the starting materials for the manufacturing of biological drugs—from disposable containers to filters. The author also discusses costs, regulations, and concerns about waste disposal, and shares his predictions for the future of the disposable bioprocessing industry. A practical manual for those interested in the transition to disposable systems, this book will also interest students of bioprocessing. It offers a timely view of disposable bioprocessing technology as a "game changer" that will facilitate developing new drugs and conducting research in the emerging field of stem cells and gene therapy

Computer-Aided Drug Design and Drug Discovery: A Prospective Analysis

In the dynamic landscape of drug discovery, Computer-Aided Drug Design (CADD) emerges as a transformative force, bridging the realms of biology and technology. This paper overviews CADDs historical evolution, categorization into structure-based and ligand-based approaches, and its crucial role in rationalizing and expediting drug discovery. As CADD advances, incorporating diverse biological data and ensuring data privacy become paramount. Challenges persist, demanding the optimization of algorithms and robust ethical frameworks. Integrating Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence amplifies CADDs predictive capabilities, yet ethical considerations and scalability challenges linger. Collaborative efforts and global initiatives, exemplified by platforms like Open-Source Malaria, underscore the democratization of drug discovery. The convergence of CADD with personalized medicine offers tailored therapeutic solutions, though ethical dilemmas and accessibility concerns must be navigated. Emerging technologies like quantum computing, immersive technologies, and green chemistry promise to redefine the future of CADD. The trajectory of CADD, marked by rapid advancements, anticipates challenges in ensuring accuracy, addressing biases in AI, and incorporating sustainability metrics. This paper concludes by highlighting the need for proactive measures in navigating the ethical, technological, and educational frontiers of CADD to shape a healthier, brighter future in drug discovery

Limitations of Protein Structure Prediction Algorithms in Therapeutic Protein Development

The three-dimensional protein structure is pivotal in comprehending biological phenomena. It directly governs protein function and hence aids in drug discovery. The development of protein prediction algorithms, such as AlphaFold2, ESMFold, and trRosetta, has given much hope in expediting protein-based therapeutic discovery. Though no study has reported a conclusive application of these algorithms, the efforts continue with much optimism. We intended to test the application of these algorithms in rank-ordering therapeutic proteins for their instability during the pre-translational modification stages, as may be predicted according to the confidence of the structure predicted by these algorithms. The selected molecules were based on a harmonized category of licensed therapeutic proteins; out of the 204 licensed products, 188 that were not conjugated were chosen for analysis, resulting in a lack of correlation between the confidence scores and structural or protein properties. It is crucial to note here that the predictive accuracy of these algorithms is contingent upon the presence of the known structure of the protein in the accessible database. Consequently, our conclusion emphasizes that these algorithms primarily replicate information derived from existing structures. While our findings caution against relying on these algorithms for drug discovery purposes, we acknowledge the need for a nuanced interpretation. Considering their limitations and recognizing that their utility may be constrained to scenarios where known structures are available is important. Hence, caution is advised when applying these algorithms to characterize various attributes of therapeutic proteins without the support of adequate structural information. It is worth noting that the two main algorithms, AlfphaFold2 and ESMFold, also showed a 72% correlation in their scores, pointing to similar limitations. While much progress has been made in computational sciences, the Levinthal paradox remains unsolved

Handbook Preformulation: Chemical, Biological and Botanical Drugs

xix, 445 hlm.; 28 cm

Handbook of pharmaceutical manufacturing formulations : semisolid products (volume 4)

xxi, 345 p. ; 29 c

The Coming of Age of Biosimilars: A Personal Perspective

Biosimilars have come of age over the past 17 years, with 84 approvals in the EU and 35 in the US, representing almost 90% of the world market. While the acceptance of biosimilars in the US is catching up with that in the EU, the cost benefits remain elusive due to the high development barrier and complex distribution system involved, mainly in the US. In the EU, the cost of biosimilars has already dropped 70% or more, and interchangeability is a routine in some European jurisdictions, unlike in the US, where a separate regulatory approval is required. This paper projects significant changes coming in the US and EU’s biosimilars approval requirements that will impact the approval procedures in the rest of the world, leading to dramatic changes in the cost of biosimilars to patients. This perspective is based on the author’s first-hand experience to secure FDA approvals of biosimilars and an extensive analysis of the rationality of testing to demonstrate biosimilarity. Multiple citizen petitions by the author and meetings with the FDA may have prompted the recent announcement by the FDA to award a $5 million research grant to scientists to develop novel testing models to establish biosimilarity, including modifying the interchangeability protocols. Soon, demonstration of biosimilarity will not require animal testing and, in most cases, clinical efficacy testing; over time, the clinical pharmacology testing will be reduced as the regulatory agencies develop more confidence in the safety and efficacy of biosimilars. Biosimilars have come of age; now it is the turn of the developers to grow up, and one way to show this is to challenge the current regulatory guidelines but only on scientific grounds to seek more concessions, for which both FDA and EMA are ready

Biosimilars: Harmonizing the Approval Guidelines

Biosimilar approval guidelines need rationalization and harmonization to remove the inconsistencies and misconceptions to enable faster, safer, and more cost-effective biosimilars. This paper proposes a platform for a model guideline based on the scientific evaluation of the regulatory filings of the 130+ products approved in the US, UK, and EU and hundreds more in the WHO member countries. Extensive literature survey of clinical data published and reported, including Clinicaltrials.gov, a review of all current guidelines in the US, UK and EU, and WHO, and detailed discussions with the FDA have confirmed that removing the animal and clinical efficacy testing and fixing other minor approaches will enable the creation of a harmonized guideline that will best suit an ICH designation

Handbook of pharmaceutical manufacturing formulations : compressed solid products, 2nd ed., vol.1/ Niazi

xxii, 622 p.: ill, tab.; 29 cm