Application of response surface methodology to maximize the productivity of scalable automated human embryonic stem cell manufacture

Regenerative Medicine

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 39-48

  Ratcliffe, Elizabeth ^a   Hourd, Paul ^a   Guijarro Leach, Juan ^a   Rayment, Erin ^a   Williams, David J ^a   Thomas, Robert J ^a  

^a LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

automation; cost of goods; human embryonic stem cell; manufacture; process control; response surface methodology; scalabilit

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CELL LOSS; CELL THERAPY; DECISION MAKING; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; METHODOLOGY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS CONTROL; PROCESS DESIGN; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PRODUCTIVITY; REGENERATIVE MEDICINE; RESPONSE SURFACE METHOD; RISK REDUCTION;

AUTOMATION; CELL COUNT; CELL CULTURE TECHNIQUES; CELL PROLIFERATION; EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84871573075     PISSN: 17460751     EISSN: 1746076X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/rme.12.109     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Mimeault M, Hauke R, Batra SK. Stem cells: a revolution in therapeutics-recent advances in stem cell biology and their therapeutic applications in regenerative medicine and cancer therapies. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 82, 252-264 (2007).
2. Mason C, Dunhill P. A brief definition of regenerative medicine. Regen. Med. 3, 1-5 (2008).
3. Williams DJ, Thomas RJ, Hourd PC et al. Precision manufacturing for clinical quality regenerative medicines. Philos. Transact. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 370, 3924-3949 (2012).
4. Ratcliffe E, Thomas RJ, Williams DJ. Current understanding and challenges in bioprocessing of stem cell-based therapies for regenerative medicine. Br. Med. Bull. 100, 137-155 (2011).
5. Mason C, Hoare M. Regenerative medicine bioprocessing: building a conceptual framework based on early studies. Tissue Eng. 13, 301-311 (2007).
6. Poon GK, Chan JS, Williams DJ. Experimental study of workpiece-level variability in blind-via electroplating. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 215, 521-530 (2001).
7. Abu-Absi SF, Yang L, Thompson P et al. Defining process design space for monoclonal antibody cell culture. Biotech. Bioeng. 106, 894-905 (2010).
8. Thomas RJ, Hourd P, Williams DJ. Application of process quality engineering techniques to improve the understanding of the in vitro processing of stem cells for therapeutic use. J. Biotechnol. 136, 148-155 (2008).
9. Kirouac D, Zandstra P. The systematic production of cells for cell therapies. Cell Stem Cell 3, 369-381 (2008).
10. Thomson JA, Itskovitz-Eldor J, Shapiro SS et al. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science 282, 1145-1147 (1998).
11. Mummery CL. Cardiology: solace for the broken-hearted? Nature 433, 585-587 (2005).
12. Denning C, Allegrucci C, Priddle H et al. Common culture conditions for maintenance and cardiomyocyte differentiation of the human embryonic stem cell lines, BG01 and HUES-7. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 50, 27-37 (2006).
13. Thomas RJ, Anderson D, Chandra A et al. Automated, scalable culture of human embryonic stem cells in feeder-free conditions. Biotech. Bioeng. 102, 1636-1644 (2009).
14. Hasegawa K, Fujioka T, Nakamura Y, Nakatsuji N, Suemori H. A method for the selection of human embryonic stem cell sub-lines with high re-plating efficiency after single-cell dissociation. Stem Cells 24, 2649-2660 (2006).
15. Anderson MJ, Whitcomb PJ. RSM Simplified: Optimizing Processes Using Response Surface Methods for Design of Experiments. Productivity Press, NY, USA (2005).
16. Watanabe K, Ueno M, Kamiya D et al. A ROCK inhibitor permits survival of dissociated human embryonic stem cells. Nat. Biotech. 25, 681-686 (2007).