Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T14:08:23.434Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A simplified model of glycoprotein production within cell culture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2016

ANNA B. LAMBERT ,
FRANK T. SMITH  and
AJOY VELAYUDHAN
ANNA B. LAMBERT
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT email: [email protected], [email protected]
FRANK T. SMITH
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT email: [email protected], [email protected]
AJOY VELAYUDHAN
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Complex biological products, such as those used to treat various forms of cancer, are typically produced by mammalian cells in bioreactors. The most important class of such biological medicines is proteins. These typically bind to sugars (glycans) in a process known as glycosylation, creating glycoproteins, which are more stable and effective medicines. The glycans are large polymers that are formed by a long sequence of enzyme catalysed reactions. This sequence is not always completed, thus leading to a heterogeneous glycoprotein distribution. A better comprehension of this distribution could lead to more efficient production of high quality drugs. To understand how the manufacturing process can affect the extent of glycosylation of protein, a non-linear ODE model of glycoprotein production is developed which describes the bioreactor configuration as well as the protein production and glycosylation reactions within the cell. The entire system evolves eventually to a stable steady state. The earlier evolution is critical however, as the amount of product produced and its quality varies over time. The model is considered as two coupled systems: the bioreactor submodel and the glycosylation submodel. To investigate the early time evolution within the bioreactor submodel, analytical and numerical properties are derived using matched asymptotic expansions and a finite difference scheme for a range of initial conditions. This leads to qualitatively different regimes for aglycosylated protein production, which affect the glycosylation submodel. The discrete glycoprotein distribution is approximated as continuous and written as a first-order PDE, with good agreement between the discrete and continuous models. The PDE is found to admit shocks, but the existence of these shocks is dependent on the early time evolution within the bioreactor submodel and leads to higher levels of glycosylation at early time. This suggests that changing the bioreactor configuration can lead to higher quality product at certain times.

Keywords

Mathematical ModelGlycosylationPost-translational modificationBioreactor
Type
Papers
Information
European Journal of Applied Mathematics , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , August 2017 , pp. 535 - 561
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Aris, R. (1989) Reactions in continuous mixtures. AIChE J. 35 (4), 539–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Aris, R. & Gavalas, G. (1966) On the theory of reactions in continuous mixtures. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 260 (1112), 351–393.Google Scholar
[3] Arnold, J. N., Wormald, M. R., Sim, R. B., Rudd, P. M. & Dwek, R. A. (2007) The impact of glycosylation on the biological function and structure of human immunoglobulins. Annu. Rev. Immunology 25 (1), 21–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[4] Band, L. R. & King, J. R. (2012) Multiscale modelling of auxin transport in the plant-root elongation zone. J. Math. Biol. 65 (4), 743–85.Google Scholar
[5] Boreskov, G. K. & Matros, Y. S. (2006) Unsteady-state performance of heterogeneous catalytic reactions. Catalysis Rev. 25 (4), 551–590.Google Scholar
[6] Bruns, D. & Bailey, J. (1975) Process operation near an unstable steady state using nonlinear feedback control. Chem. Eng. Sci. 30 (7), 755–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Chou, M. Y. & Ho, T. C. (1989) Lumping coupled nonlinear reactions in continuous mixtures. AIChE J. 35 (4), 533–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Dimitrov, D. S. (2012) Therapeutic Proteins, Humana Press, Vol. 899, New York.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[9] Edelstein-Keshet, L. (1988) Mathematical Models in Biology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, SIAM.Google Scholar
[10] Elliott, S., Lorenzini, T., Asher, S., Aoki, K., Brankow, D., Buck, L., Busse, L., Chang, D., Fuller, J., Grant, J., Hernday, N., Hokum, M., Hu, S., Knudten, A., Levin, N., Komorowski, R., Martin, F., Navarro, R., Osslund, T., Rogers, G., Rogers, N., Trail, G. & Egrie, J. (2003) Enhancement of therapeutic protein in vivo activities through glycoengineering. Nature Biotechnol. 21 (4), 414–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[11] Hossler, P., Khattak, S. F. & Li, Z. J. (2009) Optimal and consistent protein glycosylation in mammalian cell culture. Glycobiology 19 (9), 936–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[12] Hossler, P., Mulukutla, B. C. & Hu, W.-S. (2007) Systems analysis of N-glycan processing in mammalian cells. PLOS ONE 2 (8), e713.Google Scholar
[13] Jimenez del Val, I., Nagy, J. M. & Kontoravdi, C. (2011) A dynamic mathematical model for monoclonal antibody N-linked glycosylation and nucleotide sugar donor transport within a maturing Golgi apparatus. Biotechnol. Prog. 27 (6), 1730–43.Google Scholar
[14] Kim, P.-J., Lee, D.-Y. & Jeong, H. (2009) Centralized modularity of N-linked glycosylation pathways in mammalian cells. PLOS ONE 4 (10), e7317.Google Scholar
[15] Kontoravdi, C., Asprey, S. P., Pistikopoulos, S. & Mantalaris, A. (2005) European Symposium on Computer-Aided Process Engineering-15, 38th European Symposium of the Working Party on Computer Aided Process Engineering, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 20, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
[16] Krambeck, F. J. & Betenbaugh, M. J. (2005) A mathematical model of N-linked glycosylation. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 92 (6), 711–28.Google Scholar
[17] Leader, B., Baca, Q. J. & Golan, D. E. (2008) Protein therapeutics: A summary and pharmacological classification. Nature Rev. Drug Discovery 7 (1), 21–39.Google Scholar
[18] O'Dea, R. D. & King, J. R. (2011) Multiscale analysis of pattern formation via intercellular signalling. Math. Biosci. 231 (2), 172–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[19] Reichert, J. M. (2003) Trends in development and approval times for new therapeutics in the United States. Nature Rev. Drug discovery 2 (9), 695–702.Google Scholar
[20] Sinclair, A. M. & Elliott, S. (2005) Glycoengineering: The effect of glycosylation on the properties of therapeutic proteins. J. Pharmaceutical Sci. 94 (8), 1626–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[21] Smith, F. T. (2010) Finite-time break-up can occur in any unsteady interacting boundary layer. Mathematika 35 (02), 256.Google Scholar
[22] Smith, F. T. & Bowles, R. I. (1992) Transition theory and experimental comparisons on (I) Aamplification into streets and (II) a strongly nonlinear break-up criterion. Proc. Roy. Soc. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 439 (1905), 163–175.Google Scholar
[23] Smith, F. T. & Burggraf, O. R. (1985) On the development of large-sized short-scaled disturbances in boundary layers. Proc. Roy. Soc. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 399 (1816), 25–55.Google Scholar
[24] Smith, H. L. (1995) The Theory of the Chemostat: Dynamics of Microbial Competition, Cambridge University Press, England.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25] Spearman, M., Dionne, B. & Butler, M. (2011) The role of glycosylation in therapeutic antibodies. In: Al-Rubeai, Mohamed (editors), Antibody Expression and Production, Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 251–292.Google Scholar
[26] Umana, P. & Bailey, J. E. (1997) A mathematical model of N-linked glycoform Synthesis. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 55 (6), 890–908.Google Scholar
[27] von der Lieth, C. (2004) Bioinformatics for glycomics: Status, methods, requirements and perspectives. Briefings Bioinform. 5 (2), 164–178.Google Scholar