Chapter 23: Case Study for the Implementation and Utilization of a Technology Platform for Sterile-Grade Filtration

  • Christine RinnEmail author
  • Michael Siedler
Part of the AAPS Advances in the Pharmaceutical Sciences Series book series (AAPS, volume 35)


Sterile-grade filtration is a key unit operation during processing of biotherapeutics. However, selecting the optimal filter type and configuration could be a challenging task. Here we present a case study of a systematic risk-based approach for establishing a sterile filtration technology platform following Quality by Design. Since a technology platform can be considered an ideal form of prior knowledge, it is discussed how it can be leveraged to justify a reduced product-specific testing for future molecules.


Protein sterile-grade filtration Technology platform Prior knowledge Quality by Design Biotherapeutics Protein formulation 


  1. 1.
    CMC Biotech Working Group. A-Mab: a case study in bioprocess development. Version 2.1, 30 Oct 2009; 2009.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). ICH harmonized tripartite guideline: pharmaceutical development Q8(R2); 2009. Available at:
  3. 3.
    Antonsen HR, et al. Sterilizing filtration of liquids. Technical report no. 26. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol. 2008;62(5 Suppl TR26):2–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    FDA Pharmaceutical cGMP. Guidance for industry: sterile drug products produced by aseptic processing — Current good manufacturing practice; September, 2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Pharmacopeia, Ph.Eur. 9.0.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Badmington F, Wilkins R, Payne M, Honig ES. Vmax testing for practical microfiltration train scale-up in biopharmaceutical processing. Pharm Technol. 1995;19:64–76. Reprint RP576.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Decedue CJ, Unruh WP. Detection and measurements of particles in water prepared for HPLC. Biotech. 1984;2(2):78–81.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Meltzer TH. An investigation of membrane cartridge shedding. Transactions Sixth Annual Semiconductor Pure Water Conference, Santa Clara, CA, pp. 221–9; 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rajniak P, Tsinontides SC, Pham D, Hunke WA, Reynolds SD, Chern RT. Sterilizing filtration—Principles and practice for successful scale-up to manufacturing. J Membrane Sci. 2008;325:223–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ho C-C, Zydney AL. Protein fouling of asymmetric and composite microfiltration membranes. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2001;40:1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Honig ES, Schwartz PD. Impact of design and selection of prefilters on operating cost. Filtr Sep. 1997;34:73–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reis RV, Zydney A. Bioprocess membrane technology. J Membrane Sci. 2007;297:16–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Code of Federal Regulations, CFR 21, part 211.65.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KGLudwigshafenGermany

Personalised recommendations