Pharmaceutical Research

, Volume 33, Issue 11, pp 2763–2776 | Cite as

Optimization of Spray Drying Conditions for Yield, Particle Size and Biological Activity of Thermally Stable Viral Vectors

  • Daniel A. LeClair
  • Emily D. Cranston
  • Zhou Xing
  • Michael R. Thompson
Research Paper

Abstract

Purpose

This work examines the relevance of viral activity in the optimization of spray drying process parameters for the development of thermally stable vaccine powders. In some instances, the actual active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) is not included in the process optimization as it is deemed too costly to use until the final selection of operating conditions, however, that approach is inappropriate for highly labile biopharmaceutics. We investigate the effects of spray drying parameters on i) yield, ii) particle size and iii) viral vector activity of a mannitol/dextran encapsulated recombinant human type 5 adenoviral vector vaccine, to demonstrate the effects and magnitude of each effect on the three responses, and further show that the API must be included earlier in the optimization.

Methods

A design of experiments approach was used with response surface methodology (RSM) to optimize parameters including inlet temperature, spray gas flow rate, liquid feed rate and solute concentration in the feed.

Results

In general, good conditions for maintaining viral activity led to reduced yield and fewer particles of the desired size. Within the range of parameters tested, the yield varied from 50 to 90%, the percentage of ideally size particles was 10–50%, and the viral vector titre loss was 0.25–4.0 log loss.

Conclusions

RSM indicates that the most significant spray drying parameters are the inlet temperature and spray gas flow rate. It was not possible to optimize all three output variables with one set of parameters, indicating that there will only be one dominant criteria for processing which in the case of viral vaccines will likely be viral vector activity.

KEY WORDS

adenovirus optimization particle size process parameters spray dry surface response methodology titre viral vector yield 

Abbreviations

AdHu5LacZ

Recombinant human type 5 adenoviral vector expressing Escherichia coli β-galactosidase

API

Active pharmaceutical ingredient

F

Liquid feed rate

F1-5μm

Percentage of particles suitable for dry powder inhalation (1 - 5 μm size)

Mr

Relative molecular mass

Pe

Peclet number

RSM

Response surface methodology

S

Solute concentration in the liquid feed

SEM

Scanning electron microscopy

SG

Spray gas flow rate

T

Titre log loss

TE

Inlet temperature

Tg

Glass transition temperature

We

Weber number

Y

Powder yield

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLOSURES

The authors thank Dr. Pelton for equipment use and Anna Zganiacz and Xueya Feng for cell culture training and general assistance. The authors would also like to thank both the Canadian Centre for Electron Microscopy and the Biointerfaces Institute for use of their facilities. This study is supported by funds from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Supplementary material

11095_2016_2003_MOESM1_ESM.docx (588 kb)
Figure S1(DOCX 587 kb)
11095_2016_2003_MOESM2_ESM.docx (583 kb)
Figure S2(DOCX 583 kb)
11095_2016_2003_MOESM3_ESM.docx (585 kb)
Figure S3(DOCX 584 kb)
11095_2016_2003_MOESM4_ESM.docx (197 kb)
Figure S4(DOCX 197 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Brandau DT, Jones LS, Wiethoff CM, Rexroad J, Middaugh CR. Thermal stability of vaccines. J Pharm Sci. 2003;92:218–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sovizi MR. Thermal behavior of drugs: investigation on decomposition kinetic of naproxen and celecoxib. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2010;102:285–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Craig DQ, Royall PG, Kett VL, Hopton ML. The relevance of the amorphous state to pharmaceutical dosage forms: glassy drugs and freeze dried systems. Int J Pharm. 1999;179:179–207. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10053213.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dill KA, Shortle D. Denatured states of proteins. Annu Rev Biochem. 1991;60:795–825.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tanford C. Contribution of hydrophobic interactions to the stability of the globular conformation of proteins. J Am Chem Soc. 1962;84:4240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bishara RH. Cold chain management–an essential component of the global pharmaceutical supply chain. Am Pharm Rev. 2006;9:105–9. Available from: http://www.sensitech.com.mx/assets/articles/lsbisharaapr.pdf.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Croyle MA, Roessler BJ, Davidson BL, Hilfinger JM, Amidon GL. Factors that influence stability of recombinant adenoviral preparations for human gene therapy. Pharm Dev Technol. 1998;3:373–83. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9742558.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rexroad J, Evans RK, Middaugh CR. Effect of pH and ionic strength on the physical stability of adenovirus type 5. J Pharm Sci. 2006;95:237–47. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16372304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sprangers MC, Lakhai W, Koudstaal W, Verhoeven M, Koel BF, Vogels R, et al. Quantifying adenovirus-neutralizing antibodies by Luciferase Transgene detection: addressing pre-existing immunity to vaccine and gene therapy vectors. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41:5046–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elzey BD, Siemens DR, Ratliff TL, Lubaroff DM. Immunization with type 5 adenovirus recombinant for a tumor antigen in combination with recombinant canarypox virus (ALVAC) cytokine gene delivery induces destruction of established prostate tumors. Int J Cancer. 2001;94:842–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11745487.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Desobry SA, Netto FM, Labuza TP. and Freeze-drying for b -Carotene Encapsulation and Preservation INTRODUCTION. J Food Sci. 1997;62:1158–62.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sollohub K, Cal K. Spray drying technique: II. Current applications in pharmaceutical technology. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:587–97. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022354916304129.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vehring R. Pharmaceutical particle engineering via spray drying. Pharm Res. 2008;25:999–1022.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abdul-Fattah AM, Truong-Le V, Yee L, Pan E, Ao Y, Kalonia DS, et al. Drying-induced variations in physico-chemical properties of amorphous pharmaceuticals and their impact on Stability II: stability of a vaccine. Pharm Res. 2007;24:715–27. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17372697.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    LeClair DA, Cranston ED, Xing Z, Thompson MR. Evaluation of excipients for enhanced thermal stabilization of a human type 5 adenoviral vector through spray drying. Int J Pharm. 2016;506:289–301. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378517316303507.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gibbs BF, Kermasha S, Alli I, Mulligan CN. Encapsulation in the food industry: a review. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 1999;50:213–24. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10627837.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Broadhead J, Edmond Rouan SK, Rhodes CT. The spray drying of pharmaceuticals. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1992;18:1169–206. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/03639049209046327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thybo P, Hovgaard L, Lindeløv JS, Brask A, Andersen SK. Scaling up the spray drying process from pilot to production scale using an atomized droplet size criterion. Pharm Res. 2008;25:1610–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Crowe LM, Crowe JH, Rudolph A, Womersley C, Appel L. Preservation of freeze-dried liposomes by trehalose. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1985;242:240–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Crowe LM, Reid DS, Crowe JH. Is trehalose special for preserving dry biomaterials? Biophys J. 1996;71:2087–93. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(96)79407-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bhandari BR, Howes T. Implication of glass transition for the drying and stability of dried foods. J Food Eng. 1999;40:71–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    World Health Organization. Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020. WHO; 2011. p. 1–147.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maury M, Murphy K, Kumar S, Shi L, Lee G. Effects of process variables on the powder yield of spray-dried trehalose on a laboratory spray-dryer. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2005;59:565–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Elversson J, Millqvist-Fureby A. Particle size and density in spray drying-effects of carbohydrate properties. J Pharm Sci. 2005;94:2049–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grabowski JA, Truong VD, Daubert CR. Spray-drying of amylase hydrolyzed sweetpotato puree and physicochemical properties of powder. J Food Sci. 2006;71.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eldem T, Speiser P, Hincal A. Optimization of spray-dried and -congealed lipid Micropellets and characterization of their surface morphology by scanning electron microscopy. Pharm Res An Off J Am Assoc Pharm Sci. 1991;47–54.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    To BCS, Etzel MR. Spray drying, freeze drying, or freezing of three different lactic acid bacteria species. J Food Sci. 1997;62:576–8. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1997.tb04434.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Adjallé KD, Vu KD, Tyagi RD, Brar SK, Valéro JR, Surampalli RY. Optimization of spray drying process for Bacillus thuringiensis fermented wastewater and wastewater sludge. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng. 2011;34:237–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Prabakaran G, Hoti SL. Optimization of spray-drying conditions for the large-scale preparation of Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis after downstream processing. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2008;100:103–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Amaro MI, Tajber L, Corrigan OI, Healy AM. Optimisation of spray drying process conditions for sugar nanoporous microparticles (NPMPs) intended for inhalation. Int J Pharm. 2011;421:99–109.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Billon A, Bataille B, Cassanas G, Jacob M. Development of spray-dried acetaminophen microparticles using experimental designs. Int J Pharm. 2000;203:159–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jensen DMK, Cun D, Maltesen MJ, Frokjaer S, Nielsen HM, Foged C. Spray drying of siRNA-containing PLGA nanoparticles intended for inhalation. J Control Release. 2010;142:138–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Audouy SAL, van der Schaaf G, Hinrichs WLJ, Frijlink HW, Wilschut J, Huckriede A. Development of a dried influenza whole inactivated virus vaccine for pulmonary immunization. Vaccine. 2011;29:4345–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Xing Z, Ohkawara Y, Jordana M, Graham FL, Gauldie J. Transfer of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor gene to rat lung induces Eosinophilia, Monocytosis, and fibrotic reactions. J Clin Invest. 1996;97:1102–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Prinn KB, Costantino HR, Tracy M. Statistical modeling of protein spray drying at the lab scale. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2002;3:E4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Oakley DDE. Spray dryer modeling in theory and practice. Dry Technol. 2004;22:1371–402. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/DRT-120038734\nhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1081/DRT-120038734?src=recsys#.VbIyxPmqqko\nhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1081/DRT-120038734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Abràmoff MD, Magalhães PJ, Ram SJ. Image processing with image. J Biophotonics Int. 2004;11:36–41.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Elversson J, Millqvist-Fureby A, Alderborn G, Elofsson U. Droplet and particle size relationship and shell thickness of inhalable lactose particles during spray drying. J Pharm Sci. 2003;92:900–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dixon WJ. Analysis of extreme values. Ann Math Stat. 1950;21:488–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Reed L, Muench H. A simple method of estimating fifty percent endpoints. Am J Epidemiol. 1938;27:493–7.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Roos YH. Importance of glass transition and water activity to spray drying and stability of dairy powders. Lait. 2002;82:475–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vehring R, Foss WR, Lechuga-Ballesteros D. Particle formation in spray drying. J Aerosol Sci. 2007;38:728–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Winterton RHS. Newton’s law of cooling. Contemp Phys. 1999;40:205–12. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/001075199181549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Najafabadi AR, Gilani K, Barghi M, Rafiee-Tehrani M. The effect of vehicle on physical properties and aerosolisation behaviour of disodium cromoglycate microparticles spray dried alone or with L-leucine. Int J Pharm. 2004;285:97–108.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Aquino RP, Prota L, Auriemma G, Santoro A, Mencherini T, Colombo G, et al. Dry powder inhalers of gentamicin and leucine: formulation parameters, aerosol performance and in vitro toxicity on CuFi1 cells. Int J Pharm. 2012;426:100–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hancock BC, Zografi G. The relationship between the glass transition temperature and the water content of amorphous pharmaceutical solids. Pharm Res. 1994;11:471–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hede PD, Bach P, Jensen AD. Two-fluid spray atomisation and pneumatic nozzles for fluid bed coating/agglomeration purposes: a review. Chem Eng Sci. 2008;63:3821–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lin SP, Reitz RD. Drop and spray formation from a liquid jet. Annu Rev Fluid Mech. 1998;30:85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Maa YF, Costantino HR, Nguyen PA, Hsu CC. The effect of operating and formulation variables on the morphology of spray-dried protein particles. Pharm Dev Technol. 1997;2:213–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Huang D. Modeling of particle formation during spray drying. Palma, Spain: Eur. Dry. Conf; 2011.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Joo HH, Yong HC. Physico-chemical properties of protein-bound polysaccharide from Agaricus blazei Murill prepared by ultra filtration and spray drying process. Int J Food Sci Technol. 2007;42:1–8. Available from: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-33845967797&partnerID=40&md5=94d5191b29ee5d659e4699d6477f42cf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Tonon RV, Brabet C, Hubinger MD. Influence of process conditions on the physicochemical properties of açai (Euterpe oleraceae Mart.) powder produced by spray drying. J Food Eng. 2008;88:411–8. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0260877408001179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bowen M, Turok R, Maa Y-F. Spray drying of monoclonal antibodies: investigating powder-based biologic drug substance bulk storage. Dry Technol. 2013;31:1441–50. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07373937.2013.796968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gikanga B, Turok R, Hui A, Bowen M, Stauch OB, Maa Y-F. Manufacturing of high-concentration mAb formulations via spray drying - the road to manufacturing scale. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol. 2015;69:59–73. Available from: http://www.spxflow.com/en/assets/pdf/PDA_#1003_-_Manufacturing_of_High-Concentration_mAb_Formulations_via_Spray_Drying_tcm11-55210.pdf.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Klein H, Maltzman W, Levine AJ. Structure-function relationships of the adenovirus DNA-binding protein. J Biol Chem. 1979;254:11051–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Norrby E. The structural and functional diversity of adenovirus capsid components. J Gen Virol. 1969;5:221–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Ihnat PM, Vellekamp G, Obenauer-Kutner LJ, Duan J, Han MA, Witchey-Lakshmanan LC, et al. Comparative thermal stabilities of recombinant adenoviruses and hexon protein. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2005;1726:138–51. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16023295.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Baldwin RL. Temperature dependence of the hydrophobic interaction in protein folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1986;83:8069–72. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=386868&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract\n http://www.pnas.org/content/83/21/8069.short.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Day R, Bennion BJ, Ham S, Daggett V. Increasing temperature accelerates protein unfolding without changing the pathway of unfolding. J Mol Biol. 2002;322:189–203.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Monahan FJ, German JB, Kinsellat JE. Effect of pH and temperature on protein unfolding and Thiol/Disulfide interchange reactions during heat-induced Gelation of whey proteins. J Agric Food Chem. 1995;43:46–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Maa Y-F, Hsu CC. Effect of high shear on proteins. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1996;51:458–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Maa YF, Hsu CC. Protein denaturation by combined effect of shear and air-liquid interface. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1997;54:503–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    D’Souza DH, Su X, Roach A, Harte F. High-pressure homogenization for the inactivation of human enteric virus surrogates. J Food Prot. 2009;72:2418–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Dill KA. Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry. 1990;29:7133–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ghandi A, Powell IB, Howes T, Chen XD, Adhikari B. Effect of shear rate and oxygen stresses on the survival of Lactococcus lactis during the atomization and drying stages of spray drying: a laboratory and pilot scale study. J Food Eng. 2012;113:194–200. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2012.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Saluja V, Amorij JP, Kapteyn JC, de Boer AH, Frijlink HW, Hinrichs WLJ. A comparison between spray drying and spray freeze drying to produce an influenza subunit vaccine powder for inhalation. J Control Release. 2010;144:127–33. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2010.02.025.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ré MI. Microencapsulation by spray drying. Dry Technol. 1998;16:1195–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Tarek M, Tobias DJ. Role of protein-water hydrogen bond dynamics in the protein dynamical transition. Phys Rev Lett. 2002;88:138101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ippolito JA, Alexander RS, Christianson DW. Hydrogen bond stereochemistry in protein structure and function. J Mol Biol. 1990;457–71.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Prestrelski SJ, Tedeschi N, Arakawa T, Carpenter JF. Dehydration-induced conformational transitions in proteins and their inhibition by stabilizers. Biophys J. 1993;65:661–71. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1225768&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Liao Y-H, Brown MB, Nazir T, Quader A, Martin GP. Effects of sucrose and trehalose on the preservation of the native structure of spray-dried lysozyme. Pharm Res. 2002;19:1847–53. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12523664.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Amorij J-P, Huckriede A, Wilschut J, Frijlink HW, Hinrichs WLJ. Development of stable influenza vaccine powder formulations: challenges and possibilities. Pharm Res. 2008;25:1256–73. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2346510&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel A. LeClair
    • 1
  • Emily D. Cranston
    • 1
  • Zhou Xing
    • 2
  • Michael R. Thompson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.McMaster Immunology Research Centre & Department of Pathology and Molecular MedicineMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations