Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Hybrid and Disposable Facilities for Manufacturing of Biopharmaceuticals: Pros and Cons

Authors: Aline, Ravisé; Emmanuelle, Cameau; Georges, De Abreu; Alain, Pralong;

Hybrid and Disposable Facilities for Manufacturing of Biopharmaceuticals: Pros and Cons

Abstract

Modern biotechnology has grown over the last 35 years to a maturing industry producing and delivering high-value biopharmaceuticals that yield important medical and economical benefits. The constantly increasing need for biopharmaceuticals and significant costs related to time-consuming R&D work makes this industry risky and highly competitive. This trend is confirmed by the important number of biopharmaceuticals that are actually under development at all stages by all major pharmaceutical industry companies. A consequence of this evolution is an increasing need for development and manufacturing capacity. The build up of traditional - stainless steel - technology is complicated, time consuming and very expensive. The decision for such a major investment needs to be taken early in the development cycle of a promising drug to cope with future demands for clinical trials and product launch. Possibilities for the reduction of R&D and manufacturing costs are therefore of significant interest in order to be competitive.In this chapter, four case studies are presented which outline ways to reduce significantly R&D and manufacturing costs by using disposable technology in the frame of a the transfer of an antibody manufacturing process, the preparation of media and buffers in commercial manufacturing and a direct comparison of a traditional and a fully disposable pilot plant.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Biological Products, Drug Industry, Cell Culture Techniques, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Equipment Design, Recombinant Proteins, Culture Media, Automation, Bioreactors, Humans, Disposable Equipment

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!