GEN Exclusives

More »

Corporate Profiles

More »
May 1, 2011 (Vol. 31, No. 9)

Orbital Shake Bioreactors Take on Scale-Up

ExcellGene's Platform Includes No Moving Parts, Low Shear Force, and High Gas Transfer

  • Click Image To Enlarge +
    ExcellGene’s TubeSpin bioreactors were designed for use as an alternative to large-scale suspension bioreactors. According to the company, hundreds can be run simultaneously with cell culture volumes of 5 mL to 35 mL per bioreactor, which is advantageous in process development, media optimization, and rapid small-scale protein production.

    Molecular biologist Florian Wurm, Ph.D., co-founded ExcellGene in 2001 to improve large-scale mammalian cell manufacturing processes. While working for 10 years at Genentech, Hoechst, and academic institutions, Dr. Wurm, now CSO at ExcellGene, gained insights into how to enhance mammalian cell engineering and bioreactors for scale-up. “Now we drive innovation in the industry to serve our clients.”

    ExcellGene’s technology platform reportedly turns DNA constructs into purified recombinant proteins of interest within days or weeks. “Other competitors take months to do that,” Dr. Wurm insists. “Bioreactors are the core of our industry, and I’ve worked with all of them.”

    Animal cells grown in suspension cultures face two key problems: suspensions must be stirred gently to avoid damage to the cells from impellers, and oxygen is the key nutrient for animal cell cultures; however, too little or too much can kill cells. The density of cells growing in bioreactors has increased dramatically from 1 to 2 million cells per milliliter to 10 to 15 million cells per milliliter. This raises the demand for oxygen to a new level. To meet the oxygen demand, bioreactors are sparged with pure oxygen at high flow rates, but this also kills cells. Biologists and engineers who work with large-scale bioreactors struggle with these two complex problems.

  • Orbital Shaker Advantages

    Maria de Jesus, Ph.D., co-founder of ExcellGene and COO, came up with the idea to shake cells in cylindrical 50 mL tubes at slow speed. This method produces little damage because cells move in a laminar flow manner with little shear stress and turbulence. The orbital shake method also caused no damage to cells when Drs. de Jesus and Wurm scaled up to 1, 5, 10, and 100 L volumes. Thus was born ExcellGene’s orbital shake platform of bioreactors. The orbital shake bioreactor system makes it easier to scale up production because the fluid hydrodynamics remain similar for all volumes, and no moving parts are needed for stirring. The latest innovation is a 2,500 L orbital shake reactor that is in development.

    In addition to reducing cell damage, orbital shakers provide a large surface area for the exchange of gas. This large surface area results in superior oxygen transfer rates, compared to standard stainless steel tanks, and animal cells growing in orbital shakers grow better than in steel tanks. “We developed a system that combines two good things—low shear force and high gas transfer rate,” says Dr. Wurm.

    ExcellGene teamed up with Kuhner to develop the orbital shake bioreactor system. Available bioreactors range from 50 mL to 2,000 L. They include the 50 mL (10 mL working volume) Cultiflask/TubeSpin® bioreactors; the 200 L (50–150 L working volume) OrbShake bioreactor fitted with disposable Sartorius Stedim Biotech cell culture bags; and the 2,000 L (500–1,500 L working volume) OrbShake bioreactor with disposable cell culture bags. All OrbShake bioreactors are based on a disposable bag technology that avoids the need for elaborate, costly, and tedious sterilization processes.



Related content

Jobs

GEN Jobs powered by HireLifeScience.com connects you directly to employers in pharma, biotech, and the life sciences. View 40 to 50 fresh job postings daily or search for employment opportunities including those in R&D, clinical research, QA/QC, biomanufacturing, and regulatory affairs.
 Searching...
More »

GEN Poll

More » Poll Results »

Companion Animal Care

Do you think Americans spend too much on companion animal care?