Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2006.08.044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Membrane adsorbers as purification tools for monoclonal antibody purification

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
72
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 144 publications
(83 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
1
72
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The selective purification steps usually comprise the mAbs adsorption to a protein A resin, followed by two further chromatography steps which remove host cell proteins (HCP), DNA, aggregates, any leached protein A and provide an adequate level of overall viral removal [3,4]. Although chromatographic separations have been the workhorse of most purification processes, several limitations have been pointed out, such as (i) batch operation, (ii) low capacity, (iii) complex scale-up, (iv) time-consuming and high pressure packing processing, (v) slow intraparticle diffusion, (vi) low chemical and proteolytic stability and consequent contamination of the final product, and (vii) the high cost of the resins [5][6][7][8][9]. The replacement of some of these chromatographic steps by non-chromatographic alternatives, with high capacity and throughput, has been then suggested [7,[10][11][12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The selective purification steps usually comprise the mAbs adsorption to a protein A resin, followed by two further chromatography steps which remove host cell proteins (HCP), DNA, aggregates, any leached protein A and provide an adequate level of overall viral removal [3,4]. Although chromatographic separations have been the workhorse of most purification processes, several limitations have been pointed out, such as (i) batch operation, (ii) low capacity, (iii) complex scale-up, (iv) time-consuming and high pressure packing processing, (v) slow intraparticle diffusion, (vi) low chemical and proteolytic stability and consequent contamination of the final product, and (vii) the high cost of the resins [5][6][7][8][9]. The replacement of some of these chromatographic steps by non-chromatographic alternatives, with high capacity and throughput, has been then suggested [7,[10][11][12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The simulation studies which compare the IEM with IEC were done by Frerick, et al 69,70 Comparing to columnbased separations, the membrane chromatography has some advantages such as high separation efficiencies due to shorter diffusion times, [71][72][73] reduction in buffer usage, small floor space requirements, 74 simple method without complex hardware or packing necessities. 75 In spite of this advantages, expensive membrane and low efficiency of this technique for industrial purposes is an important drawback which causes the new technology | 501…”
Section: Ion Exchange Chromatography (Iec)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sie funktionieren als extrem kurze chromatographische Säulen mit großem Durchmesser [3 -5]. Durch Verwendung solcher Membraneinheiten können einige Probleme überwunden werden, die mit den klassischen Trägermaterialien verbunden sind [6]. [8].…”
Section: Einleitung Und Problemstellungunclassified