Fresh lysozyme artificially increased the signal intensity of the PyroGene™ assay. The dry chemical stock of lysozyme possibly harboured Gram-negative microbes or pyrogenic byproducts. Unlike with the LAL assay, high molecular weight carbohydrates such as carrageenan were not found to enhance the PyroGene™ assay [42]. Several of the tested substances (i.e. BSA, HA, lysozyme, and dextran) exhibited apparent enhancement when initially tested. As these liquid samples had been stored non-sterile

at 5 °C for two weeks, fresh stocks were prepared. Using the fresh stocks, no enhancement was observed, highlighting LY2157299 price the importance of mitigating potential Gram-negative bacteria contamination. None of the tested species consistently interfered

except for those shown in Fig. 9. Utilization of the PyroGene™ assay will necessitate extensive dilution (i.e. 10−3–10−4) to eliminate interference from bacterial feedstreams. The level of dilution will be predicated on the concentration and nature of components in the sample background, with samples upstream in the process requiring greater dilution than the more purified streams found further downstream in the process. Although the magnitude of the inhibition is significant, the PyroGene™ assay is still suitable for measuring endotoxin in impure pools. In polysaccharide process streams derived from Gram negative bacteria, the starting concentrations of endotoxin are high. These values often exceed 20,000,000 EU/mL (personal communication from Dr. Bernie Violand;

Pfizer R&D). However, the linear range BMS-354825 concentration of the PyroGene™ assay is 0.01–10 EU/mL, necessitating multiple serial dilutions to fall within the standard curve. Because of the large difference between the range of the PyroGene™ assay and typical endotoxin concentrations, Adenylyl cyclase it is possible to measure adequate LRV of endotoxin, even when factoring in dilution to eliminate interference (Table 4). With such high amounts of endotoxin present, dilution to 10−3–10−4 should still enable the demonstration of 5–6 log removal value (LRV) of endotoxin clearance for harvest samples and 2–3 LRV of endotoxin clearance for polishing steps. Demonstration of adequate clearance may be hampered in samples taken downstream of polishing steps. The capability to automate assays used to inform purification process development is clearly an important attribute. All of the described assays can be integrated into an automated analytical platform, enabling multi-faceted characterization of impurity clearance and product yield in less than one day by a single scientist. Automation requires an initial upfront investment of effort to refine but can be indispensable when repeat analyses are required. In purification process development, several high throughput screens can be run to evaluate different unit operations or distinct modes within a given unit operation.