Recent Advances and Future Directions in Downstream Processing of Therapeutic Antibodies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the advent of many new therapies, therapeutic monoclonal antibodies remain a prominent biologics product, with a market value of billions of dollars annually. A variety of downstream processing technological advances have led to a paradigm shift in how therapeutic antibodies are developed and manufactured. A key driver of change has been the increased adoption of single-use technologies for process development and manufacturing. An early-stage developability assessment of potential lead antibodies, using both in silico and high-throughput experimental approaches, is critical to de-risk development and identify molecules amenable to manufacturing. Both statistical and mechanistic modelling approaches are being increasingly applied to downstream process development, allowing for deeper process understanding of chromatographic unit operations. Given the greater adoption of perfusion processes for antibody production, continuous and semi-continuous downstream processes are being increasingly explored as alternatives to batch processes. As part of the Quality by Design (QbD) paradigm, ever more sophisticated process analytical technologies play a key role in understanding antibody product quality in real-time. We should expect that computational prediction and modelling approaches will continue to be advanced and exploited, given the increasing sophistication and robustness of predictive methods compared to the costs, time, and resources required for experimental studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".