ArticleToxicon: X2024
Pilot-scale evaluation of a dynamic body-feed filtration system for primary clarification of snake antivenoms produced by the caprylic acid method.
Article in Toxicon: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The performance of dynamic body-feed filtration (DBF) in the removal of bulky solids produced during the manufacturing of snake antivenoms using the caprylic acid method was evaluated. For this purpose, diatomites with different filterability properties were compared in a bench-scale study to assess their effectiveness in removing the precipitated material formed after the addition of caprylic acid to equine hyperimmune plasma. C1000 diatomite at a concentration of 90 g/L of precipitated plasma showed the best performance. Then, the process was scaled up to three batches of 50 L of hyperimmune horse plasma. At this pilot scale, 108 ± 4% of the immunoglobulins present following plasma precipitation were recovered after DBF. The antivenoms generated using this procedure met quality specifications. When compared to open filtration systems commonly used at an industrial scale by many antivenom manufacturers, DBF has a similar yield and produces filtrates with comparable physicochemical characteristics. However, DBF ensures the microbiological quality of the primary clarification in a way that open systems cannot. This is because: 1) DBF is performed in a single-use closed device of depth filters which prevents microbial contamination, and 2) DBF removes bulky material in few minutes instead of the more than 24 h needed by open filtration systems, thus reducing the risk of contamination. It was concluded that DBF is a cost-effective, easily validated, and GMP-compliant alternative for primary clarification following caprylic acid precipitation of plasma in snake antivenom production.
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.