Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39997873›Full record

ArticleNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Membrane Filtration of Nanoscale Biomaterials: Model System and Membrane Performance Evaluation for AAV2 Viral Vector Clarification and Recovery.

Mara Leach, Kearstin Edmonds, Emily Ingram, Rebecca Dutch, Ranil Wickramasinghe, Malgorzata Chwatko, Dibakar Bhattacharyya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mara LeachDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-5655-7646
Kearstin EdmondsCollege of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.
Emily IngramDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.
Rebecca DutchCollege of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.
Ranil WickramasingheDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.
Malgorzata ChwatkoDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2770-5196
Dibakar BhattacharyyaDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9948-9085

Funding

U.S. National Science Foundation 2218054
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The growing demand for viral vectors as nanoscale therapeutic agents in gene therapy necessitates efficient and scalable purification methods. This study examined the role of nanoscale biomaterials in optimizing viral vector clarification through a model system mimicking real AAV2 crude harvest material. Using lysed HEK293 cells and silica nanoparticles (20 nm) as surrogates for AAV2 crude harvest, we evaluated primary (depth filters) and secondary (membrane-based) filtration processes under different process parameters and solution conditions. These filtration systems were then assessed for their ability to recover nanoscale viral vectors while reducing DNA (without the need for endonuclease treatment), protein, and turbidity. Primary clarification demonstrated that high flux rates (600 LMH) reduced the depth filter's ability to leverage adsorptive and electrostatic interactions, resulting in a lower DNA removal. Conversely, lower flux rates (150 LMH) enabled >90% DNA reduction by maintaining these interactions. Solution conductivity significantly influenced performance, with high conductivity screening electrostatic interactions, and the model system closely matching real system outcomes under these conditions. Secondary clarification highlighted material-dependent trade-offs. The PES membranes achieved exceptional AAV2 recovery rates exceeding 90%, while RC membranes excelled in DNA reduction (>80%) due to their respective surface charge and hydrophilic properties. The integration of the primary clarification step dramatically improved PES membrane performance, increasing the final flux from ~60 LMH to ~600 LMH. Fouling analysis revealed that real AAV2 systems experienced more severe and complex fouling compared to the model system, transitioning from intermediate blocking to irreversible cake layer formation, which was exacerbated by nanoscale impurities (~10-600 nm). This work bridges nanomaterial science and biomanufacturing, advancing scalable viral vector purification for gene therapy.

Indexed as

AAV2downstream bioprocessingfouling modelsgene therapymembrane filtrationsilica nanoparticles

Identifiers

PMID39997873
PMCPMC11858591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.