2017
DOI: 10.1002/biot.201600579
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microscale disruption of microorganisms for parallelized process development

Abstract: Escherichia coli, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and Pichia pastoris are the standard platforms for biopharmaceutical production with 40% of all between 2010 to 2014 approved protein drugs produced in those microbial hosts. Typically, products overexpressed E. coli and S. cerevisiae remain in the cytosol or are secreted into the periplasm. Consequently, efficient cell disruption is essential for high product recovery during microbial production. Process development platforms at microscale are essential to shorten t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 82 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Because mechanical methods are nonspecific, with release of the entire intracellular content, which increases the difficulty of further processing, some nonmechanical methods have been conducted, such as physical disruption, chemical permeabilization, and enzymatic disruption . Chemical permeabilization could be attained by chelating agents, chaotropes, detergents, or organic solvents .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Because mechanical methods are nonspecific, with release of the entire intracellular content, which increases the difficulty of further processing, some nonmechanical methods have been conducted, such as physical disruption, chemical permeabilization, and enzymatic disruption . Chemical permeabilization could be attained by chelating agents, chaotropes, detergents, or organic solvents .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The comparison was conducted under the same conditions, except for the concentrations of chemical penetrants. The traditional chemical penetrants were used at the optimal concentrations reported previously . The results are shown in Figure .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various other HT cell disruption/lysis devices have been used, including an 8well-sonifier for VLPs from E. coli, a 24-well-HT sonication device for 15 cells including bacteria, fungi, and yeasts, and microfluidic channels (96-well-format) for thermal treatment, osmotic shocks, and freeze-drying (Baumann and Hubbuch, 2017). In a review, microscale disruption of microorganisms (as low as 200 µl) for parallelized process development was discussed in detail along with their performance compared with high-pressure homogenization (Walther and Dürauer, 2017). HT refolding systems for IB-expressed proteins are also available commercially and are listed in Table 5 (Baumann and Hubbuch, 2017), together with some of the other HTP devices used in downstream process development.…”
Section: High-throughput Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[2,3] Ultrasonication could disrupt the algal cells effectively. [4,5] Compared with other methods, it involves no assistance materials, and its energy requirement is relatively low. [6] Ultrasonication could also be used to disrupt algal cells, in a combination with other methods such as H 2 O 2 oxidation, alkali, nozzle spraying, high-pressure homogenization.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%