Retrospective assessment of clonality of a legacy cell line by analytical subcloning of the master cell bank.

In recent years, assurance of clonality of the production cell line has been emphasized by health authorities during review of regulatory submissions. When insufficient assurance of clonality is provided, augmented control strategies may be required for a commercial production process. In this study, we conducted a retrospective assessment of clonality of a legacy cell line through analysis of subclones from the master cell bank (MCB). Twenty-four subclones were randomly selected based on a predetermined acceptance sampling plan. All these subclones share a conserved integration junction, thus providing a high level of assurance that the cell population in the MCB was derived from a single progenitor cell. However, Southern blot analysis indicates that at least four subpopulations possibly exist in the MCB. Additional characterization of these four subpopulations demonstrated that the resulting changes in product quality attributes of some subclones are not related to the genetic heterogeneity observed in Southern blot hybridization. Furthermore, process consistency, process comparability, and analytical comparability have been demonstrated in batches produced across varying manufacturing processes, scales, facilities, cell banks, and cell ages. Finally, process and product consistency together with a high level of assurance of clonal origin of the MCB helped clear the hurdle for regulatory approval without requirement of additional control strategies.

Confronting the ethical challenges to informed consent in emergency medicine research.

The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine believes that protection of human subjects is vital in emergency medicine research and that, whenever feasible, informed consent is at the heart of that protection. At the same time, the emergency setting presents unique barriers to informed consent both because of the time frame in which the research is performed and because patients in the emergency department are a vulnerable population. This report reviews the concept of informed consent, empirical data on patients' cognitive abilities during an emergency, the federal rules allowing exemption from consent under certain circumstances, issues surrounding consent forms, and the new Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations as they relate to research. The authors conclude that, in many circumstances, informed consent is possible if the researcher is diligent and takes time to adequately explain the study to the potential subject. In cases in which it is possible to obtain consent, precautions must be taken to ensure that subjects have decision-making capacity and are offered time to have their questions answered and their needs met. Sometimes resuscitation and other emergency medicine research must be conducted without the ability to obtain consent. In these cases, special protections of subjects under the exception from consent guidelines must be followed. Protection of research subjects is the responsibility of every researcher in emergency medicine.