From Vaccine Research to Manufacture

A Guide for the Researcher
  • Nigel Allison
  • Howard S. Tranter
Part of the Methods in Molecular Medicine™ book series (MIMM, volume 87)


Organizations that are involved primarily in research activities, such as academic departments, may often be largely unaware of the economics and regulations related to the production of a biopharmaceutical in a licensed facility using current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP). In a research environment, the goal is usually to produce the product of interest to a high level of purity, using whatever methods are available, for use in a particular study. Little consideration may be given to process reproducibility and optimization, since only small quantities of highly purified material are usually required, and at such a scale of operation, economic factors are of little importance. In contrast, GMP manufacture of material for human or veterinary use is subject to regulation by the competent authorities responsible for controlling the quality, safety, and licensure of medicinal products in countries in which the product is to be registered for use (e.g., Medicines Control Agency, UK; European Medicines Evaluation Agency; US Food and Drug Administration. GMP requires that “products are consistently produced and controlled to the quality standards appropriate to their intended use” (1). The costs involved in testing product, raw materials, and monitoring the manufacturing environment to ensure that the product meets its specification, together with those of operating at large scale, may be substantial. Thus, it is essential to keep such costs to a minimum to ensure an economical manufacturing process.


Technology Transfer Vaccine Antigen Product Stream Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Research Phase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    The Medicines Control Agency (2002) Rules and guidance for pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors (2002). London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gregersen, J-P. (1997) Vaccine Development: The long road from initial idea to product licensure, in New Generation Vaccines, 2nd ed., (Levine, M. M., Woodrow, G. C., Kaper J. B., and Cobon, G. S., eds.), Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp. 1165–1177.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (May 2001) Note for guidance on minimising the risk of transmitting animal spongiform encephalopathy agents via. human and veterinary medicinal products. CPMP/BWP/1230.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (April 2000) Letter to manufacturers of biological products: Recommendations regarding bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    International Conference on Harmonisation (1995) Q5B: Quality of Biotechnological Products: Analysis of the Expression Construct in Cells used for Production of r-DNA Derived Protein Products.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    International Conference on Harmonisation (1997) Q5D: Quality of Biotechnological Products: Derivation and Characterisation of Cell Substrates used for the Production of Biotechnological/Biological Products.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Robinson, A., Tranter, H. S., Wiblin, C. N. W., and Hambleton, P. (1995) Development and Production of Vaccines, in Microbiological Quality Assurance A Guide Towards Relevance and Reproducibility of Inocula. (Brown, M. R. W. and Gilbert, P., eds.) CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 235–246.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A Guide to the Genetically Modified Organisms (contained use) Regulations (2000). HSE Books, Sudbury, UK.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maurer, R., Meyer, B. J., and Ptashne, M. (1980) Genetic regulation at the right operator (0R) of bacteriophage λ-0R3 and autogenous negative control by repressor. J. Mol. Biol. 139, 147–161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meerman, H. J. and Georgiou, G. (1994) Construction and characterisation of a set of Escherichia coli strains deficient in all known loci affecting proteolytic stability of secreted recombinant proteins. Bio/Technology 12, 1107–1110.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rudolph, R. and Lilie, H. (1996) In vitro folding of inclusion body proteins. FASEB J. 10, 49–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schein, C. H. and Noteborn, M. H. M. (1988) Formation of soluble recombinant proteins in Escherichia coli is favoured by lower growth temperatures. Bio/Technology 6, 291–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garg, V. K., Costello, M. A. C., and Czuba, B. A. (1991) Purification and production of therapeutic grade proteins, in Purification and Analysis of Recombinant Proteins. (Seetharam, R., and Sharma, S. K., eds.), Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, pp. 29–54.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Draeger, M. N. and Chase, H. A. (1991) Liquid fluidised bed adsorption of proteins in the presence of cells. Bioseparations 2, 67–80.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hambleton, P., Capel, B., Bailey, N., Heron, N., Crooks, A., Melling, J., et al. (1981) Production, purification and toxoiding of Clostridium botulinum type A toxin, in Biomedical Aspects of Botulism. (Lewis, G. E., ed.), Academic Press, New York, London, pp. 247–260.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Allison, N., Brehm, R., Harrison, S., Hiscott, S., Osborne, S., Ridgeway, P., et al. (1999) Large-scale GMP manufacture of staphylococcal enterotoxin B. Abstracts from 4th International Conference on Separations for Biotechnology.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    European Pharmacopoeia, 4th ed. (2002) Bacterial Endotoxins, pp. 140–147.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Walsh, G. (1998) Biopharmaceuticals: Biochemistry and Biotechnology. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp. 75–157.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ICH Guideline CPMP/ICH/295/95 (1997). Quality of biotechnological products: Viral safety evaluation of biotechnological products derived from cell lines of human or animal origin.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rappuoli, R. (1997) New and improved vaccines against diphtheria and tetanus, in New Generation Vaccines 2nd ed., (Levine, M. M., Woodrow, G. C., Kaper, J. B., and Cobon, G. S., eds.), Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, pp 417–436.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    ICH Guideline CPMP/ICH/365/96 (1999) Specifications: Test procedures and acceptance criteria for biotechnological/biological products.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Biddle, J. A. (1999) Technology transfer: what you always wanted to know but were afraid to ask, in Vaccines from Concept to Clinic. (Paoletti, L. C. and McInnes, P. M., eds.), CRC Press, pp. 127–174.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nigel Allison
    • 1
  • Howard S. Tranter
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Applied Microbiology and ResearchHealth Protection AgencySalisburyUK

Personalised recommendations