Scientist Solutions: Life Science Discussions
 Refer a Friend    Link To Us    Bookmark Us       

      
 » Home » Drug Discovery/Manufacturing » Equipment » Best Bioreactors for High Concentration Mab's

Other Topics
11/21/2008 02:45 PM
Molecular Devices GT Anal ...
11/20/2008 11:31 AM
from where to get pure cu ...
4/14/2008 06:26 PM
High Throughput Planar Pa ...
3/20/2008 06:10 PM
Thermo Fisher Scientific ...
2/29/2008 06:44 PM
RTS Life Science Launches ...
2/16/2007 06:59 AM
18F-FLT purification
2/14/2007 10:19 PM
curcumin isolation
5/31/2006 02:52 AM
Supplier for Pure Curcumi ...
5/31/2006 01:10 AM
Dissolving curcumin
4/21/2005 11:07 PM
Theranostics equipments o ...
Best Bioreactors for High Concentration Mab's(8 Votes)
Integra CELLine flask CL1000  62.50% -5 Votes
Miniperm  25.00% -2 Votes
Wave Bioreactor  12.50% -1 Votes
Subscribet to topic
Add Reply  Add New Topic  Add New Poll
bottom of page RSS Feed 

Topic Feed

 

Best Bioreactors for High Concentration Mab's

 [View Printable]
marcia

Adult Frog

See
Similar
Scientists



View Blogs


Group: Admin
Posts: 173
Joined: Mar 17, 2004







 Send a personal messsage to marcia Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

Pick which bioreactor performs best and give us your comments.

.........................
"Some men see things as they are and say why.
I dream things that never were and say why not."
Robert F. Kennedy


 Posted May 01, 2004, 20:46 PM
marcia

Adult Frog

See
Similar
Scientists



View Blogs


Group: Admin
Posts: 173
Joined: Mar 17, 2004







 Send a personal messsage to marcia Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

The CELLine flask is by far the best for research scale antibody production. You almost always see a 20 fold increase in concentration. And contamination is rarely an issue like in the miniperm. Alex Karu did a comprehensive paper at UC-Berkeley comparing the miniperm to the CL1000.

The miniperm couldn't even finish a run without contamination and the concentration was .25mg/ml. The CL1000 produced on average 2 mg/ml and in 40 days produced on average 140 mgs of mab.

The wave is is just a big bag without a semipermeable membrane so you still have to purify a large quantity of sup.
And you are going to use alot of serum.

And the CL1000 is also really good for CHO and 293 for expressing protein.

The CL1000 seems expensive but the Karu article shows that w/ the serum and labor savings, it is inexpensive. With the CL1000 it is so much easier to purify compared with ascites which alot of junk in it - including virus.

Just make sure w/ the CL1000 to harvest from the right port! and to let the cells get to 5 x 10 E8 before harvesting - it should look like a milkshake.

.........................
"Some men see things as they are and say why.
I dream things that never were and say why not."
Robert F. Kennedy


Posted May 17, 2004, 1:16 AM
Soudabeh

Moderator

See
Similar
Scientists





Group: Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Apr 23, 2004







 Send a personal messsage to Soudabeh Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

marcia said:
Pick which bioreactor performs best and give us your comments.


I think roller bottles can be a good alternative since cell Line flasks are so expensive.

.........................

Posted Oct 09, 2004, 17:09 PM
NathF

Frog Egg

[ Privacy ]
See
Similar
Scientists





Group: Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Oct 09, 2004







Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

I think wave bioreactor can be a good way since it is scalable

.........................
[ Privacy ]

Posted Oct 11, 2004, 13:32 PM
may

Frog Egg

See
Similar
Scientists





Group: Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Oct 12, 2004







 Send a personal messsage to may Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

I agree with the last post regarding scalability of wave bioreactor.

.........................

Posted Oct 13, 2004, 2:55 AM
Germey

Frog Egg

See
Similar
Scientists





Group: Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Nov 03, 2004







 Send a personal messsage to Germey Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

Like so many things in science, the best one will depend on your specific needs. I used to provide tech support for the miniPERM, and it really does have some technical advantages over the CeLLine in that the constant motion promotes gas exchange and is advantageous for growth on microcarriers. Marcia obviously had some bad experiences with the MiniPERM, but I dealt with several large academic labs that had problems with the CeLLine and were very happy with the MiniPERM. The biggest problem with the MiniPERM is the price. I am not sure if that is getting better since the distribution changed, but it is still a German product, so don't expect Wal-Mart Pricing.

.........................
Jeremy Jerome
San Diego, CA.

Posted Dec 16, 2004, 21:00 PM
Lucy

Frog Egg

See
Similar
Scientists





Group: Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Dec 11, 2004







 Send a personal messsage to Lucy Reply with a quote from this post Go to the top of the page

I have used all 3 and the CELLine is the best for me b/c I do small scale and only need a few mgs at a time and can get it very fast; however, I have heard that for scalability, the wave is good; I don't think the Integra CELLine has bigger flasks than the one liter.

The miniperm I haven't tried - don't know much about.

.........................

Posted Dec 23, 2004, 22:05 PM
top of page Add Reply  Add New Topic  Add New Poll

Forum Jump