Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
A major challenge of a mass-spectrometry-based quantitative multiattribute method (MAM) for biotherapeutics is its high variability between instruments. For reproducible attribute measurements, not only is a similar instrument model required, but the instruments must also be tuned to the same condition. This poses great long-term challenges, considering the rapid development of new instrumentations. In addition, differences in digestion efficiency, peptide recovery, and artificial modifications during sample preparation also contribute to variability between laboratories. To overcome these challenges, new mathematical methods are developed to calculate the attribute abundance in the sample, using the reference standard (RS) material as calibrant. Most quality attributes in the RS remain constant throughout the life of the standard, and therefore, the RS can serve as a calibrant to correct for the difference between instruments or sample preparation procedures. Because RS data are usually collected in a MAM assay, no additional work is required from the analyst. Data from a large number of attributes demonstrated that these methodologies greatly reduced instrument-to-instrument and sample preparation variabilities. With these methodologies, a consistent instrument model and sample preparation procedure is no longer a requirement. As a result, changes in digestion procedure and advances in instrumentations will not significantly affect the assay result.
Zhang et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: