Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lyophilization of Biologics: An FDA Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Lyophilized Biologics and Vaccines

Abstract

Lyophilization has become an important part of the biopharmaceutical industry as more biological entities are being explored as therapeutic agents. For biologics, whose formulation and storage in aqueous solution result in instability, lyophilization represents the most common and important formulation strategy to improving their long-term stability. The process of lyophilization is a complex, multistep process that requires a sound understanding of both product and process-related attributes to ensure higher operational efficiency and consistently acceptable final product.

This chapter provides an overview of the application of quality by design (QbD) principles to the lyophilization of biologics from a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) science perspective. Unlike other unit operations in several dosage form development, lyophilization is not a very-well-understood process. It is critical that the process is well understood to obtain a product that consistently meets the labeled therapeutic claim. In this chapter, there is particular focus on the key steps in the application of QbD with specific examples as applied to the lyophilization of a model monoclonal antibody, as well as the application of process analytical technology (PAT) tools for monitoring and control of the process.

The views expressed in this chapter are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the Agency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. PAT guidance for industry—a framework for innovative pharmaceutical development, manufacturing and quality assurance; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Woodcock J. Pharmaceutical quality in the 21st century—an integrated systems approach. In: AAPS workshop on pharmaceutical quality assessment—a science and risk-based CMC approach in the 21st century; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Food and Drug Administration. Q8 (R1) pharmaceutical development. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm128005.pdf. Accessed: 8 Oct 2013; 2008.

  4. Food and Drug Administration. Q9 quality risk management. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/…/Guidances/ucm073511.pdf. Accessed: 8 Oct 2013; 2006.

  5. Food and Drug Administration. Q10 pharmaceutical quality systems. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/ucm073517.pdf. Accessed: 8 Oct 2013; 2009.

  6. Nasr MM. Implementation of quality by design (QbD)—current perspectives on opportunities and challenges topic introduction and ICH update. Presented at advisory committee for pharmaceutical science and clinical pharmacology, US Food and drug Administration, 27 Jul 2011; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jameel F, Khan MA. Quality-by-design as applied to the development and manufacturing of a lyophilized protein product. Am Pharm Rev. 2009;12:20–4.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rathore SA, Winkle H. Quality by design for biopharmaceuticals. Nat Biotechnol. 2009;27(1):26–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yu LX. Pharmaceutical quality by design: product and process development, understanding, and control. Pharml Res. 2008;25(4):781–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rosencrance S. QbD status updates for generic drugs. Presented at GPhA Fall technical conference, 3–5 Oct 2011; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Office of Biotechnology Products, US Food and Drug Administration. Notice of pilot program for submission of quality information for biotechnology products in the Office of Biotechnology Products, Food and Drug Administration, docket number FDA-2008-N-0355. http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/FDA-2008-N-0355-n.pdf. Accessed: 8 Oct 2013; 2013.

  12. Kasper JC, Friess W (2011) The freezing step in lyophilization: physico-chemical fundamentals, freezing methods and consequences on process performance and quality attributes of biopharmaceuticals. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 78:248–263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pikal MJ, Rambhatla S, Ramot R. The impact of the freezing stage in lyophilization: effects of the ice nucleation temperature on process design and product quality. Am Pharm Rev. 2002;5:48–53.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tang X, Pikal M. Design of freeze-drying processes for pharmaceuticals: practical advice. Pharm Res. 2004;21:191–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rathore AS. Roadmap for implementation of quality by design (QbD) for biotechnology products. Trends Biotechnol. 2009;27(9):546–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kenett RS, Kenett DA. Quality by design applications in biosimilar pharmaceutical products. Accred Qual Assur. 2008;13:681–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cleland JL, Lam X, Kendrick B, et al. A specific molar ratio of stabilizer to protein is required for storage stability of a lyophilized monoclonal antibody. J Pharm Sci. 2001;90(3):310–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry and review staff: target product profile-a strategic development process tool. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm080593.pdf. Accessed: 8 Oct 2013; 2007.

  19. Awotwe-Otoo D, Agarabi C, Wu GK, et al. Quality by design: Impact of formulation variables and their interactions on quality attributes of a lyophilized monoclonal antibody. Int J Pharm. 2012;438(1–2):167–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tang X, Nail SL, Pikal MJ. Evaluation of manometric temperature measurement, a process analytical technology tool for freeze-drying: part I, product temperature measurement. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech. 2006;7(1):E1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nail SL, Searles JA. Elements of quality by design in development and scale-up of freezed-dried parenterals. Bio Pharm Int. 2008;21(1):44–50.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Schneid S. Rational approaches and transfer strategies for the scale-up of freeze-drying cycles. Chem Today. 2011;29(1):43–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sundaram J, Hsu CC, Shay MY, Sane SU. Design space development for lyophilization using DOE and process modeling. Bio Pharm Int. 2010;23(9):26–36.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mujat M, Greco K, Galbally-Kinney KL, et al. Optical coherence tomography-based freeze-drying microscopy. Biomed Opt Express. 2012;3(1):55–63.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Meister E, Gieseler H. Freeze-dry microscopy of protein/sugar mixtures: drying behavior, interpretation of collapse temperatures and a comparison to corresponding glass transition data. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98(9):3072–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Awotwe-Otoo D, Agarabi C, Read EK, et al. Impact of controlled ice nucleation on process performance and quality attributes of a lyophilized monoclonal antibody. Int J Pharm. 2013;450(1–2):70–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Liao X, Krishnamurthy R, Suryanarayanan R. Influence of processing conditions on the physical state of mannitol—implications in freeze-drying. Pharm Res. 2007;24:370–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Passot S, Trelea IC, Marin M, et al. Effect of controlled ice nucleation on primary drying stage and protein recovery in vials cooled in a modified freeze-dryer. J Biomech Eng. 2009;131:074511–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Searles JA, Carpenter JF, Randolph TW. The ice nucleation temperature determines the primary drying rate of lyophilization for samples frozen on a temperature-controlled shelf. J Pharm Sci. 2001;90(7):860–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shon M. ControLyoâ„¢ nucleation on-demand technology moving from lab to production: a case study. http://www.spscientific.com/ArticlesAndTechnicalPapers/. Accessed: 10 Oct 2013; 2013.

  31. Patel SM, Pikal MJ. Process analytical technologies (PAT) in freeze-drying of parenteral products. Pharm Dev Technol. 2009;14(6):567–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Patel SM, Doen T, Pikal MJ. Determination of end point of primary drying in freeze-drying process control. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech. 2010;11(1):73–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. De Beer TR, Allesø M, Goethals F, et al. Implementation of a process analytical technology system in a freeze-drying process using Raman spectroscopy for in-line process monitoring. Anal Chem. 2007;79(21):7992–8003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. De Beer TR, Vercruysse P, Burggraeve A, et al. In-line and real-time process monitoring of a freeze drying process using Raman and NIR spectroscopy as complementary process analytical technology (PAT) tools. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98(9):3430–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Schneid SC, Gieseler H, Kessler WJ, Pikal MJ. Non-invasive product temperature determination during primary drying using tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98(9):3406–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Schneid SC, Gieseler H, Kessler W, Pikal MJ. Tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy (TDLAS) as a residual moisture monitor for the secondary drying stage of freeze drying. Proceedings of AAPS Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Product Quality Research, Office of Testing and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 20993, Silver Spring, MD, USA

    David Awotwe-Otoo & Mansoor A. Khan

Authors
  1. David Awotwe-Otoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mansoor A. Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Holly Springs, North Carolina, USA

    Dushyant Varshney

  2. Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Holly Springs, North Carolina, USA

    Manmohan Singh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Awotwe-Otoo, D., Khan, M. (2015). Lyophilization of Biologics: An FDA Perspective. In: Varshney, D., Singh, M. (eds) Lyophilized Biologics and Vaccines. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2383-0_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation