ArticleThe AAPS journal2025
Calibration Transfer Across Instrument Vendors for Bioprocess Raman Monitoring.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Raman spectroscopy is a proven Process Analytical Technology (PAT) for monitoring mammalian cell culture processes in biopharmaceutical manufacturing. In-line Raman probes provide real-time chemical fingerprints of metabolites and cell culture health analyzed via chemometric modeling. However, Raman hardware (e.g. cables, detectors, optics, probes, and lasers) and software - performing calibration, noise reduction, and cosmic ray removal - impart vendor specific spectral signatures, rendering Raman chemometric models specific to the vendors. This vendor specificity complicates method validation and transfer between manufacturing sites deploying different vendor equipment and impedes upgrades, maintenance, and replacement of obsolete Raman equipment. In this work, we compared two calibration transfer methods to address vendor-to-vendor variation. Piecewise Direct Standardization (PDS) and Spectral Subspace Transformation (SST) methods successfully reduced spectral response variation between previous (Parent) and new (Child) Raman systems. We tested calibration transfer results with offline samples and an established validation approach utilizing paired spectra from Parent and Child Raman systems. Finally, we explored the influence of calibration transfer parameters including training set size, preprocessing position, and window size (number of components) for PDS and SST. Through this investigation we demonstrate the feasibility of this proposed vendor-to-vendor calibration transfer approach as a promising and effective chemometric model transfer between Raman vendors without significant method re-development or re-validation. This approach improves agility within the deployment strategy of chemometric models across supply chain networks and bolsters Raman spectroscopy as a versatile PAT tool for advanced manufacturing within the biopharmaceutical industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41136795What 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.