ArticleMolecular therapy. Methods & clinical development2021
Complete intra-laboratory validation of a LAL assay for bacterial endotoxin determination in EBV-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes.
Article in Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful transport across continents of GMP-manufactured and cryopreserved culture-expanded human fetal liver-derived mesenchymal stem cells for use in a clinical trial.Regenerative therapy · 2024Article
- High-Throughput Analysis of Bacterial Toxic Lipopolysaccharide in Water by Dual-Wavelength Monitoring Using a Ratiometric Fluorescent Chemosensor.Analytical chemistry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endotoxin content is a critical factor that affects the safety of biological pharmaceutical products. International pharmacopoeias describe several reference methods to determine endotoxin levels in advanced therapy medicinal product (ATMP) preparations. Administration of ATMPs must be done as rapidly as possible to ensure complete viability and potency of the cellular product. To evaluate the endotoxin content in the shortest time possible, we chose to validate an alternative method based on the use of the Charles River Portable Testing System (PTS) and FDA-approved cartridges, compliant with the requirements of the European Pharmacopoeia and providing results in <20 min. Here, we describe a unique and complete validation approach for instrument, personnel, and analytical method for assessment of endotoxins in ATMP matrices. The PTS system provides high sensitivity and fast quantitative results and uses less raw material and accessories compared with compendial methods. It is also less time consuming and less prone to operator variability. Our validation approach is suitable for a validated laboratory with trained personnel capable of conducting the ATMP release tests, and with very low intra-laboratory variability, and meets the criteria required for an alternative approach to endotoxin detection for in-process and product-release testing of ATMPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.