RESUMO
The multi-attribute method has been recognized as an elegant quantification tool for post-translational modifications (PTMs) of therapeutic proteins, since it can evaluate several attributes spontaneously and site-specifically. Here, the abundance of PTMs calculated by three different types of formula were compared and there was little difference among the results. For the method evaluation, two different kinds of peptides were used as internal standards (ISs) and one of the IS was used as the "standard peak" to define the signal strength of MS. They are also used for system suitability testing to verify whether the condition or sensitivity of mass spectrometry are high enough to evaluate the minor components by confirming the recovery rate of one IS to the another. This system is beneficial that since we have defined the limit of quantification as a certain ratio to IS, consistent MS intensity is applied as the threshold across all detected peaks.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais , Processamento de Proteína Pós-Traducional , Espectrometria de Massas , Peptídeos , Controle de QualidadeRESUMO
Human antithrombin (AT) has two isoforms of which the predominant α-form is glycosylated on all four possible glycosylation sites and the lower abundant ß-isoform lacks the oligosaccharide on Asn135. The main oligosaccharide structure of human AT consists of biantennary complex-type oligosaccharides lacking a core fucose. Generally, Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells produce recombinant human AT (rhAT) with core-fucosylated oligosaccharides. However, rhAT lacking core-fucose oligosaccharides can be produced by POTELLIGENT® technology, which uses FUT8 knockout CHO cells in production. The rhAT has more variable glycan structures, such as tetra-antennary complex type, high-mannose type, and mannose 6-phosphate species as minor components compared to plasma-derived human AT (phAT). In addition, the site-specific glycan profile was different between two ATs. We evaluated the effect of these properties on efficacy and safety based on a comparison of rhAT made by that technology with phAT in terms of their respective oligosaccharide structures, site-specific oligosaccharide profiles, and the ratio of α- and ß-forms. Although some structural differences were found between the rhAT and phAT, we concluded that these differences have no significant effect on the efficacy and safety of rhAT.