Elsevier

Vaccine

Volume 32, Issue 8, 12 February 2014, Pages 1003-1011
Vaccine

Production of high-titer human influenza A virus with adherent and suspension MDCK cells cultured in a single-use hollow fiber bioreactor

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.11.044Get rights and content

Abstract

Hollow fiber bioreactors (HFBRs) have been widely described as capable of supporting the production of highly concentrated monoclonal antibodies and recombinant proteins. Only recently HFBRs have been proposed as new single-use platforms for production of high-titer influenza A virus. These bioreactors contain multiple hollow fiber capillary tubes that separate the bioreactor in an intra- and an extra-capillary space. Cells are usually cultured in the extra-capillary space and can grow to a very high cell concentration. This work describes the evaluation of the single-use hollow fiber bioreactor PRIMER HF® (Biovest International Inc., USA) for production of influenza A virus. The process was setup, characterized and optimized by running a total of 15 cultivations. The HFBRs were seeded with either adherent or suspension MDCK cells, and infected with influenza virus A/PR/8/34 (H1N1), and the pandemic strain A/Mexico/4108/2009 (H1N1). High HA titers and TCID50 of up to 3.87 log10 (HA units/100 μL) and 1.8 × 1010 virions/mL, respectively, were obtained for A/PR/8/34 influenza strain. Influenza virus was collected by performing multiple harvests of the extra-capillary space during a virus production time of up to 12 days. Cell-specific virus yields between 2,000 and 8,000 virions/cell were estimated for adherent MDCK cells, and between 11,000 and 19,000 virions/cell for suspension MDCK.SUS2 cells. These results do not only coincide with the cell-specific virus yields obtained with cultivations in stirred tank bioreactors and other high cell density systems, but also demonstrate that HFBRs are promising and competitive single-use platforms that can be considered for commercial production of influenza virus.

Introduction

Cell culture-based manufacturing of influenza viruses offers several advantages compared to the conventional production using fertilized chicken eggs. The easier and faster scalability in case of a pandemic [1], the possibility to run a fully characterized process [2], comparable immunogenicity with egg-derived vaccines [3], [4], [5], and high virus yields [6] are some advantages of cell cultures. These reasons have led to the approval of cell culture-derived vaccines as Optiflu® and Flucelvax® (both manufactured by Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Germany) in Europe and the USA, respectively.

Continuous cell lines as MDCK, Vero, HEK.293, and PER.C6® [1], [7], [8] have been characterized for production of influenza virus in industry and research. These cells can be cultivated to large scales with the use of bioreactors, thus improving virus yields and achieving commercially relevant production capacities [9], [10]. Fed-batch culture, and the use of microcarriers in stirred tank bioreactors (STR) are strategies that can lead to high cell concentration, with values in the order of 1 × 107 cells/mL [11], [12]. Nevertheless, limitations of medium compounds and the accumulation of toxic metabolites at these high densities are known to induce shifts in the cell-specific virus yield [13], [14]. This so called “cell density effect” could be avoided with the use of perfusion systems as filtration, cross flow filters, spin-filters, acoustic filter [12], and alternating tangential flow systems (ATF®) [15], [16], [17], [18]. In this scenario, the use of hollow fiber bioreactors (HFBRs), which is a type of perfusion system, has been only recently proposed for production of influenza virus [19].

HFBRs [20], [21] have been widely used in tissue engineering [22] as well as for production of monoclonal antibodies [23] and recombinant proteins [24]. These platforms are able to support the growth of in vivo-like cell densities for weeks and even months, and cell densities can be even 100-fold higher than common suspension cell cultures [25]. HFBRs consist of a cartridge with up to thousands of capillaries, which separate the cartridge volume in two compartments, known as the intra-capillary space (ICS) and the extra-capillary space (ECS). Typically, cells are grown protected from shear stresses in the ECS, while medium flows through the ICS and can exchange substrates and inhibitors with the ECS through the hollow fiber membranes. These bioreactors have been used to study pharmacodynamics of antiviral and antimicrobial compounds [26] and, in a first try, Hirschel et al. [19] have proposed the use of HFBRs as production platform for influenza A virus at high concentrations. The work of Hirschel et al. showed that, by infecting adherent MDCK (ATCC) cells with the pandemic strain A/Mexico/4108/2009, infectious virus concentrations up to 1 × 109 virions/mL and total virus concentrations between 1 × 1010 and 1 × 1011 virions/mL can be obtained. These results motivated to continue with a more thorough study.

In this work, we characterize a process for production of influenza A virus using single-use HFBRs. For this purpose, an adherent MDCK (ECACC) and a suspension MDCK.SUS2 cell line derived herefrom [27] were cultured in the ECS of the HFBRs. Both cell lines were infected with the A/PuertoRico/8/34 (H1N1), and the A/Mexico/4108/2009 (H1N1) pandemic strains. Total and infectious virus productions were characterized for both cells, and finally, cell-specific virus yield and space-time virus yield of the HFBRs were estimated and compared to the data reported for other production platforms as classical STR, wave bioreactors (Wave®), and ATF® system.

Section snippets

Cell lines and cell cultivation

Adherent MDCK cells (ECACC, #84121903) (hereafter referred as MDCK) were scaled up in vented tissue culture flasks (Cellstar, Greiner bio-one) at 37 °C, 5% CO2 with serum-free medium Episerf (Gibco Invitrogen) supplemented with 2 mM l-glutamine (Sigma), 2 mM pyruvate (Sigma), and 20 mM d-glucose (Roth). Cultivations in flasks were started with approximately 4.0 × 104 cells/cm2.

Suspension MDCK.SUS2 cells [27] (hereafter referred as MDCK.SUS2) were maintained and scaled-up in 125 or 250 mL vented shaker

Number of MDCK and MDCK.SUS2 cells grown in ECS at time of infection

A total of 1.4 × 109 MDCK cells were counted from the run A1 (see Table 1), and therefore the number of MDCK cells grown in HFBRs was assumed to be between 1 × 109 and 2 × 109 (TMCM, see Section 2.6) cells. In contrast, a slightly lower number of 8 × 108 MDCK.SUS2 cells were counted from S1. However, subsequent HFBRs runs showed that the number of MDCK.SUS2 cells growing inside the ECS was larger (up to 1.8 × 109 cells), therefore the cell number used to calculate the MOI was different for each run with

Cell growth and glucose uptake rate

Rodrigues et al. proposed the use of GUR as an indirect method for monitoring cell growth [30]. Nevertheless, a more recent work indicated that strong changes in pH could induce variations in the GUR [31]. This can explain the higher GUR (0.91 mmol/h) observed in ARM2, as the fresh medium added to the system just before time of infection increased the pH from 7.2 to 7.6 (pH data of ARM2 not shown). Nevertheless, the use of GUR is recommended as long as process conditions are carefully controlled.

Conclusions

It was demonstrated that single-use HFBRs appear to be a promising alternative for production of influenza A virus with very high HA (up to 3.87 log10 (HA units/100 μL)) and TCID50 (up to 5.6 × 1010 virions/mL) titers, and similar CSVY when compared to other established production platforms. Further research with HFBRs for production of other seasonal and pandemic influenza A and B strains could explore, for example, infections at different MOIs and their impact on virus yields, as well as the scale

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the Naval Health Research Center, USA, for sending the A/Mexico/4108/2009 influenza strain.

References (43)

  • B. Peschel et al.

    Comparison of influenza virus yields and apoptosis-induction in an adherent and a suspension MDCK cell line

    Vaccine

    (2013)
  • Y. Genzel et al.

    Continuous cell lines as a production system for influenza vaccines

    Expert Rev Vaccines

    (2009)
  • B. Sun et al.

    Production of influenza H1N1 vaccine from MDCK cells using a novel disposable packed-bed bioreactor

    Appl Microbiol Biotechnol

    (2013)
  • J.M. Katz et al.

    Efficacy of inactivated influenza A virus (H3N2) vaccines grown in mammalian cells or embryonated eggs

    J Infect Dis

    (1989)
  • S. Frey et al.

    Clinical efficacy of cell culture-derived and egg-derived inactivated subunit influenza vaccines in healthy adults

    Clin Infect Dis

    (2010)
  • J.P. Gregersen et al.

    Safety of MDCK cell culture-based influenza vaccines

    Future Microbiol

    (2011)
  • A. Bock et al.

    High-density microcarrier cell cultures for influenza virus production

    Biotechnol Prog

    (2011)
  • E. Petiot et al.

    Metabolic and kinetic analyses of influenza production in perfusion HEK293 cell culture

    BMC Biotechnol

    (2011)
  • K.T.K. Wong et al.

    Low multiplicity infection of insect cells with a recombinant baculovirus: the cell yield concept

    Biotechnol Bioeng

    (1996)
  • D.A. Lindsay et al.

    Quantification of cell-culture factors affecting recombinant protein yields in baculovirus-infected insect cells

    Biotechnol Bioeng

    (1992)
  • M. Kuczewski et al.

    A single-use purification process for the production of a monoclonal antibody produced in a PER.C6 human cell line

    Biotechnol J

    (2011)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text