Carter, PJ. Introduction to current and future protein therapeutics: A protein engineering perspective. Exp Cell Res. 2011; 317(9): 1261–1269.Google Scholar

Leader, B, Baca, QJ, Golan, DE. Protein therapeutics: A summary and pharmacological classification. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2008; 7(1): 21–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Samanen, J. Similarities and differences in the discovery and use of biopharmaceuticals and small-molecule chemotherapeutics. In: Ganellin, C, Jefferis, R, Roberts, S, editors. Introduction to biological and small molecule drug research and development. Elsevier; 2013. p. 161–203.Google Scholar

Wurm, FM. Production of recombinant protein therapeutics in cultivated mammalian cells. Nat Biotech. 2004; 22(11): 1393–1398.Google Scholar

Demain, AL, Vaishnav, P. Production of recombinant proteins by microbes and higher organisms. Biotechnol Adv. 2009; 27(3): 297–306.Google Scholar

Kaspar, AA, Reichert, JM. Future directions for peptide therapeutics development. Drug Discov Today. 2013; 18(17–18): 807–817.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Pina, AS, Lowe, CR, Roque, ACA. Challenges and opportunities in the purification of recombinant tagged proteins. Biotechnol Adv. 2014; 32(2): 366–381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Arnau, J, Pedersen, J. A universal platform for the purification of therapeutic proteins using affinity tags: The use of engineered aminopeptidases for His-tag removal. BioProcess J. 2006; 5(3): 59–65.Google Scholar

Uversky, V, Orengo, C, Bateman, A. Protein families: Relating protein sequence, structure, and function. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2013.Google Scholar

Sammut, SJ, Finn, RD, Bateman, A. Pfam 10 years on: 10 000 families and still growing. Brief Bioinform. 2008; 9(3): 210–219.Google Scholar

Finn, RD, Coggill, P, Eberhardt, RY, Eddy, SR, Mistry, J, Mitchell, AL, et al. The Pfam protein families database: Towards a more sustainable future. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016; 4(44): 279–285.Google Scholar

Shukla, AA, Hubbard, B, Tressel, T, Guhan, S, Low, D. Downstream processing of monoclonal antibodies – Application of platform approaches. J Chromatogr B. 2007; 848(1): 28–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ecker, DM, Jones, SD, Levine, HL. The therapeutic monoclonal antibody market. MAbs. 2015; 7(1): 9–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Huang, CJ, Lin, H, Yang, X. Industrial production of recombinant therapeutics in Escherichia coli and its recent advancements. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012; 39(3): 383–399.Google Scholar

Clark, EdB. Protein refolding for industrial processes. Curr Opin Biotech. 2001; 12(2): 202–207.Google Scholar

Walsh, G, Jefferis, R. Post-translational modifications in the context of therapeutic proteins. Nat Biotech. 2006; 24(10): 1241–1252.Google Scholar

Bailey, JE, Ollis, DF. Biochemical engineering fundamentals. Second edition. McGraw-Hill; 1986.Google Scholar

Katoh, S, Horiuchi, J, Yoshida, F. Biochemical engineering. Second edition. Wiley-VCH; 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shuler, ML, Kargi, F, Delisa, M. Bioprocess engineering. Basic concepts. Third edition. Prentice Hall; 2017.Google Scholar

Liu, HF, Ma, J, Winter, C, Bayer, R. Recovery and purification process development for monoclonal antibody production. MAbs. 2010; 2(5): 480–499.Google Scholar

Carta, G, Jungbauer, A. Protein chromatography: Process development and scale-up. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Curling, J. The development of antibody purification technologies. In: Gottschalk, U, editor. Process scale purification of antibodies. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2008. p. 25–52.Google Scholar

Hober, S, Nord, K, Linhult, M. Protein A chromatography for antibody purification. J Chromatogr B. 2007; 848(1): 40–47.Google Scholar

Boedeker, BGD. Recombinant Factor VIII (Kogenate^®) for the treatment of hemophilia A: The first and only world-wide licensed recombinant protein produced in high-throughput perfusion culture. In: Knablein, J, editor. Modern biopharmaceuticals. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA; 2013. p. 429–443.Google Scholar

Burnouf, T, Radosevich, M. Affinity chromatography in the industrial purification of plasma proteins for therapeutic use. J Biochem Biophys Meth. 2001; 49(13): 575–586.Google Scholar

Allen, RR, Felix, F. Affinity chromatography of enzymes. In: Hage, DS, editor. Handbook of affinity chromatography, Second edition. Chromatographic science series. CRC Press; 2005. p. 313–346.Google Scholar

Arunakumari, A, Wang, J. Purification of human monoclonal antibodies: Non-protein A strategies. In: Gottschalk, U, editor. Process scale purification of antibodies. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2008. p. 103–123.Google Scholar

Zhou, JX, Tressel, T. Basic concepts in Q membrane chromatography for large-scale antibody production. Biotechnol Prog. 2006; 22(2):341–349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ghosh, R. Protein separation using membrane chromatography: Opportunities and challenges. J Chromatogr A. 2002; 952(12): 13–27.Google Scholar

Pabby, AK, Rizvi, SSH, Sastre, AM. Handbook of membrane separations: Chemical, pharmaceutical, food and biotechnological applications. CRC Press; 2015.Google Scholar

Saraswat, M, Musante, L, Ravid, A, Shortt, B, Byrne, B, Holthofer, H. Preparative purification of recombinant proteins: Current status and future trends. BioMed Res Int. 2013; 2013: 312709.Google Scholar

Hustedt, H, Kroner, KH, Menge, U, Kula, MR. Protein recovery using 2-phase systems. Trends Biotechnol. 1985; 3(6): 139–144.Google Scholar

Rosa, PAJ, Ferreira, IF, Azevedo, AM, Aires-Barros, MR. Aqueous two-phase systems: A viable platform in the manufacturing of biopharmaceuticals. J Chromatogr A. 2010; 1217(16): 2296–2305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Oelmeier, SA, Dismer, F, Hubbuch, J. Application of an aqueous two-phase systems high-throughput screening method to evaluate mAb HCP separation. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2011; 108(1): 69–81.Google Scholar

Asenjo, JA, Andrews, BA. Aqueous two-phase systems for protein separation: A perspective. J Chromatogr A. 2011; 1218(49): 8826–8835.Google Scholar

Glynn, J. Process-scale precipitation of impurities in mammalian cell culture broth. In: Gottschalk, U, editor. Process scale purification of antibodies. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2008. p. 309–324.Google Scholar

Thömmes, J, Gottschalk, U. Alternatives to packed-bed chromatography for antibody extraction and purification. In: Gottschalk, U, editor. Process scale purification of antibodies. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2008. p. 293–308.Google Scholar

Gagnon, P. Technology trends in antibody purification. J Chromatogr A. 2012; 1221: 57–70.Google Scholar

Mollerup, I, Jensen, SW, Larsen, P, Schou, O, Snel, L. Insulin purification. In: Flickinger, MC, Drew, SW, editors. Encyclopedia of bioprocess technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010. p. 1–7.Google Scholar

Mehta, A, Lovato Tse, M, Fogle, J, Len, A, Shrestha, R, Fontes, N, et al. Purifying therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. Society for Biological Engineering; 2008.Google Scholar

Remingtonm, KM. Fundamental strategies for viral clearance – Part 2: Technical approaches. BioProcess International; 2015.Google Scholar

European Medicines Agency. Guideline on virus safety evaluation of biotechnological investigational medicinal products; 2006.Google Scholar

Johnson, SA, Brown, MR, Lute, SC, Brorson, KA. Adapting viral safety assurance strategies to continuous processing of biological products. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2017; 114(1): 21–32.Google Scholar

Daugherty, AL, Mrsny, RJ. Formulation and delivery issues for monoclonal antibody therapeutics. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2006; 58(56): 686–706.Google Scholar

Ohtake, S, Kita, Y, Arakawa, T. Interactions of formulation excipients with proteins in solution and in the dried state. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2011; 63(13): 1053–1073.Google Scholar

Frokjaer, S, Otzen, DE. Protein drug stability: A formulation challenge. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005; 4(4): 298–306.Google Scholar

Mach, H, Meyer, BK, Shameem, M. Properties of protein formulations. In: Meyer, BK, editor. Therapeutic protein drug products. Woodhead Publishing; 2012. p. 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Houp, RC. Ultrafiltration and diafiltration. J Validation Technol; 2009 15(4): 40–45.Google Scholar

Zydney, AL. Membrane technology for purification of therapeutic proteins. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2009; 103(2): 227–230.Google Scholar

Meyer, BK, Coless, L. Compounding and filling: Drug substance to drug product. In: Meyer, BK, editor. Therapeutic protein drug products. Woodhead Publishing; 2012. p. 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meyer, BK, Shameem, M. Commercial therapeutic protein drug products. In: Meyer, BK, editor. Therapeutic protein drug products. Woodhead Publishing; 2012. p. 1–11.Google Scholar

Carpenter, JF, Chang, BS, Garzon-Rodriguez, W, Randolph, TW. Rational design of stable lyophilized protein formulations: Theory and practice. In: Carpenter, JF, Manning, MC, editors. Rational design of stable protein formulations: Theory and practice. Springer US; 2002. p. 109–133.Google Scholar

Jungbauer, A, Kaar, W, Schlegl, R. Folding and refolding of proteins in chromatographic beds. Curr Opin Biotech. 2004; 15(5): 487–494.Google Scholar

Stephanopoulos, N, Francis, MB. Choosing an effective protein bioconjugation strategy. Nat Chem Biol. 2011; 7(12): 876–884.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Morbidelli, M. Process for protein PEGylation. J Control Release. 2014; 180: 134–149.Google Scholar

Teicher, BA, Chari, RV. Antibody conjugate therapeutics: Challenges and potential. Clin Cancer Res. 2011; 17(20): 6389–6397.Google Scholar

ICH Harmonised tripartite guideline. Q6B. Specifications: Test procedures and acceptance criteria for biotechological/biological products. CPMP/ICH/365/96; 1999.Google Scholar

Ratanji, KD, Derrick, JP, Dearman, RJ, Kimber, I. Immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: Influence of aggregation. J Immunotoxicol. 2014; 11(2): 99–109.Google Scholar

Vázquez-Rey, M, Lang, DA. Aggregates in monoclonal antibody manufacturing processes. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2011; 108(7): 1494–1508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Consortium, SG. Protein production and purification. Nature Methods. 2008; 5(2): 135–146.Google Scholar

Johnston, A, Adcock, W. The use of chromatography to manufacture purer and safer plasma products. Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev. 2000; 17: 37–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Denizli, A. Plasma fractionation: Conventional and chromatographic methods for albumin purification. Hacettepe J Biol Chem. 2011; 39(4): 315–341.Google Scholar

Andersson, L, Blomberg, L, Flegel, M, Lepsa, L, Nilsson, B, Verlander, M. Large-scale synthesis of peptides. Biopolymers. 2000; 55(3): 227–250.Google Scholar

Remingtonm, KM. Fundamental strategies for viral clearance – Part 1: Exploring the regulatory implications. BioProcess International; 2015.Google Scholar

ICH Harmonised tripartite guideline. Q5A(R1). Viral safety evaluation of biotechnology products derived from cell lines of human or animal origin. CPMP/ICH/295/95; 1999.Google Scholar

Cordoba-Rodriguez, RV. Aggregates in mAbs and recombinant therapeutic proteins: A regulatory perspective. BioProcess International; 2008.Google Scholar

Fekete, S, Beck, A, Fekete, J, Guillarme, D. Method development for the separation of monoclonal antibody charge variants in cation exchange chromatography – Part II: pH gradient approach. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2015; 102: 282–289.Google Scholar

Epstein, MS, Ehrenpreis, ED, Kulkarni, PM, the FDARMCotACoG. Biosimilars: The Need, the challenge, the Future: The FDA perspective. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014; 109(12): 1856– 1859.Google Scholar

Zhao, YY, Wang, N, Liu, WH, Tao, WJ, Liu, LL, Shen, ZD. Charge variants of an avastin biosimilar isolation: Characterization, in vitro properties and pharmacokinetics in rat. PLoS ONE. 2016; 11(3): e0151874.Google Scholar

Voisard, D, Meuwly, F, Ruffieux, PA, Baer, G, Kadouri, A. Potential of cell retention techniques for large-scale high-density perfusion culture of suspended mammalian cells. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2003; 82(7): 751–765.Google Scholar

Kompala, DS, Ozturk, SS. Optimization of high cell density perfusion bioreactors. In: Ozturk, SS, Hu, WS, editors. Cell culture technology for pharmaceutical and cell-based therapies. CRC Press; 2005. p. 387–416.Google Scholar

Reay, D, Ramshaw, C, Harvey, A. Process intensification: Engineering for efficiency, sustainability and flexibility. Second edition. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2013.Google Scholar

Anderson, NG. Practical use of continuous processing in developing and scaling up laboratory processes. Org Process Res Dev. 2001; 5(6): 613–621.Google Scholar

Vervaet, C, Remon, JP. Continuous granulation in the pharmaceutical industry. Chem Eng Sci. 2005; 60(14): 3949–3957.Google Scholar

Poechlauer, P, Manley, J, Broxterman, R, Gregertsen, B, Ridemark, M. Continuous processing in the manufacture of active pharmaceutical ingredients and finished dosage forms: An industry perspective. Org Process Res Dev. 2012; 16(10): 1586–1590.Google Scholar

Byrn, S, Futran, M, Thomas, H, Jayjock, E, Maron, N, Meyer, RF, et al. Achieving continuous manufacturing for final dosage formation: Challenges and how to meet them. May 20–21, 2014 Continuous Manufacturing Symposium. J Pharm Sci. 2015; 104(3): 792–802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Adamo, A, Beingessner, RL, Behnam, M, Chen, J, Jamison, TF, Jensen, KF, et al. On-demand continuous-flow production of pharmaceuticals in a compact, reconfigurable system. Science. 2016; 352(6281): 61–67.Google Scholar

Konstantinov, KB, Cooney, CL. White paper on continuous bioprocessing. May 20–21, 2014 Continuous Manufacturing Symposium. J Pharm Sci. 2015; 104(3): 813–820.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Nicoud, RM. The amazing ability of continuous chromatography to adapt to a moving environment. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2014; 53(10): 3755–3765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Langer, ES, Rader, RA. Continuous bioprocessing and perfusion: Wider adoption coming as bioprocessing matures. BioProcess J. 2014; 13(1): 43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jungbauer, A. Continuous downstream processing of biopharmaceuticals. Trends Biotechnol. 2013; 31(8): 479–492.Google Scholar

Pollock, J, Ho, SV, Farid, SS. Fed-batch and perfusion culture processes: Economic, environmental, and operational feasibility under uncertainty. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2013; 110(1): 206–219.Google Scholar

Steinebach, F, Müller-Späth, T, Morbidelli, M. Continuous counter-current chromatography for capture and polishing steps in biopharmaceutical production. Biotechnol J. 2016; p. 1126–1141.Google Scholar

Pall Life Science. Is continuous bioprocessing the future? BioProcess International. Sponsored supplement; 2016.Google Scholar

Walther, J, Godawat, R, Hwang, C, Abe, Y, Sinclair, A, Konstantinov, K. The business impact of an integrated continuous biomanufacturing platform for recombinant protein production. J Biotechnol. 2015; 213: 3–12.Google Scholar

Xenopoulos, A. A new, integrated, continuous purification process template for monoclonal antibodies: Process modeling and cost of goods studies. J Biotechnol. 2015; 213: 42–53.Google Scholar

Klutz, S, Holtmann, L, Lobedann, M, Schembecker, G. Cost evaluation of antibody production processes in different operation modes. Chem Eng Sci. 2016; 141: 63–74.Google Scholar

Bunnak, P, Allmendinger, R, Ramasamy, SV, Lettieri, P, Titchener-Hooker, NJ. Life-cycle and cost of goods assessment of fed-batch and perfusion-based manufacturing processes for mAbs. Biotechnol Prog. 2016; 32(5): 1324–1335.Google Scholar

Subramanian, G, editor. Continuous processing in pharmaceutical manufacturing. Wiley; 2015.Google Scholar

Croughan, MS, Konstantinov, KB, Cooney, C. The future of industrial bioprocessing: Batch or continuous? Biotechnol Bioeng. 2015; 112(4): 648–651.Google Scholar

Subramanian, G. Continuous biomanufacturing: Innovative technologies and methods. John Wiley & Sons; 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Karst, DJ, Steinebach, F, Morbidelli, M. Continuous integrated manufacturing of therapeutic proteins. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2018; 53: 76–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sawyer, D, Sanderson, K, Lu, R, Daszkowski, T, Clark, E, Mcduff, P, et al. Biomanufacturing technology roadmap – Executive summary. BioPhorum Operations Group; 2017.Google Scholar

Jayaraman, K. India’s cipla sets sights on Avastin, Herceptin and Enbrel. Nat Biotech. 2010; 28(9): 883–884.Google Scholar

Kuhn, TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press; 1962.Google Scholar

Chatterjee, S. FDA perspective on continuous manufacturing. IFPAC Annual Meeting, Baltimore; 2012.Google Scholar

Allison, G, Cain, YT, Cooney, C, Garcia, T, Bizjak, TG, Holte, O, et al. Regulatory and quality considerations for continuous manufacturing. May 20–21, 2014 Continuous Manufacturing Symposium. J Pharm Sci. 2015; 104(3): 803–812.Google Scholar

Levenspiel, O. Chemical reaction engineering. Third edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 1999.Google Scholar

Fogler, HS. Elements of chemical reaction engineering. Fourth edition. Prentice Hall; 2005.Google Scholar

Villiger, TK, Roulet, A, Perilleux, A, Stettler, M, Broly, H, Morbidelli, M, et al. Controlling the time evolution of mAb N-linked glycosylation, Part I: Microbioreactor experiments. Biotechnol Prog. 2016; 32(5): 1123–1134.Google Scholar

Xu, S, Chen, H. High-density mammalian cell cultures in stirred-tank bioreactor without external pH control. J Biotechnol. 2016; 231: 149–159.Google Scholar

Karst, DJ, Steinhoff, RF, Kopp, MRG, Serra, E, Soos, M, Zenobi, R, et al. Intracellular CHO cell metabolite profiling reveals steady-state dependent metabolic fingerprints in perfusion culture. Biotechnol Prog. 2017; 33(4): 879–890.Google Scholar

Nicoud, RM. From batch to continuous processes: A good answer, but what is the question? Part I – General considerations and the reaction unit perspective. Chemistry Today. 2016; 34(4): 38–43.Google Scholar

Nicoud, RM. From batch to continuous processes: A good answer, but what is the question? Part II – The purification unit operations, specific situations, the complete process perspective. 2016. 2016; 34(5): 33–38.Google Scholar

Yang, WC, Lu, J, Kwiatkowski, C, Yuan, H, Kshirsagar, R, Ryll, T, et al. Perfusion seed cultures improve biopharmaceutical fed-batch production capacity and product quality. Biotechnol Prog. 2014; 30(3): 616–625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hecht, V, Duvar, S, Ziehr, H, Burg, J, Jockwer, A. Efficiency improvement of an antibody production process by increasing the inoculum density. Biotechnol Prog. 2014; 30(3): 607–615.Google Scholar

Karst, DJ, Serra, E, Villiger, TK, Soos, M, Morbidelli, M. Characterization and comparison of ATF and TFF in stirred bioreactors for continuous mammalian cell culture processes. Biochem Eng J. 2016; 110: 17–26.Google Scholar

Hutter, S, Villiger, TK, Bruhlmann, D, Stettler, M, Broly, H, Soos, M, et al. Glycosylation flux analysis reveals dynamic changes of intracellular glycosylation flux distribution in Chinese hamster ovary fed-batch cultures. Metab Eng. 2017; 43(Pt A): 9–20.Google Scholar

Karst, DJ, Scibona, E, Serra, E, Bielser, JM, Souquet, J, Stettler, M, et al. Modulation and modeling of monoclonal antibody N-linked glycosylation in mammalian cell perfusion reactors. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2017; 114(9): 1978–1990.Google Scholar

Chrysanthopoulos, PK, Goudar, CT, Klapa, MI. Metabolomics for high-resolution monitoring of the cellular physiological state in cell culture engineering. Metab Eng. 2010; 12(3): 212–222.Google Scholar

Steinhoff, RF, Karst, DJ, Steinebach, F, Kopp, MR, Schmidt, GW, Stettler, A, et al. Microarray-based MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry enables monitoring of monoclonal antibody production in batch and perfusion cell cultures. Methods. 2016; 104: 33–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bertrand, V. Intracellular profiling for biopharmaceutical cultivation processes. ETH Zurich; 2018.Google Scholar

Vernardis, SI, Goudar, CT, Klapa, MI. Metabolic profiling reveals that time related physiological changes in mammalian cell perfusion cultures are bioreactor scale independent. Metab Eng. 2013; 19: 1–9.Google Scholar

Karst, DJ, Steinhoff, RF, Kopp, MRG, Soos, M, Zenobi, R, Morbidelli, M. Isotope labeling to determine the dynamics of metabolic response in CHO cell perfusion bioreactors using MALDI-TOF-MS. Biotechnol Prog. 2017; 33(6): 1630–1639.Google Scholar

Konstantinov, K, Goudar, C, Ng, M, Meneses, R, Thrift, J, Chuppa, S, et al. The “push-to-low” approach for optimization of high-density perfusion cultures of animal cells. Adv Biochem Eng Biot. 2006; 101: 75–98.Google Scholar

Vogel, JH, Nguyen, H, Pritschet, M, Van Wegen, R, Konstantinov, K. Continuous annular chromatography: General characterization and application for the isolation of recombinant protein drugs. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2002; 80(5): 559–568.Google Scholar

Hilbrig, F, Freitag, R. Continuous annular chromatography. J Chromatogr B. 2003; 790(12): 1–15.Google Scholar

Uretschläger, A, Jungbauer, A. Preparative continuous annular chromatography (P-CAC), a review. Bioproc Biosyst Eng. 2002; 25(2): 129–140.Google Scholar

Wolfgang, J, Prior, A. Continuous annular chromatography. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol. 2002; 76: 233–255.Google Scholar

Bloomingburg, GF, Carta, G. Separation of protein mixtures by continuous annular chromatography with step elution. Chem Eng J Biochem Eng. 1994; 55(1): B19–B27.Google Scholar

Brozio, J, Bart, HJ. A rigorous model for annular chromatography. Chem Eng Technol. 2004; 27(9): 962–970.Google Scholar

Evans, DH, Piermarini, PM, Choe, KP. The multifunctional fish gill: Dominant site of gas exchange, osmoregulation, acid-base regulation, and excretion of nitrogenous waste. Physiol Rev. 2004; 85(1): 97–177.Google Scholar

Broughton, DB, Gerhold, CG, inventors; Continuous sorption process employing fixed bed of sorbent and moving inlets and outlets. US 2985589 A; 1961, filing date.Google Scholar

Majozi, T. Batch chemical process integration. Analysis, synthesis and optimization. Springer; 2010.Google Scholar

[125] El-Halwagi, MM. Process integration. vol. 7. Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar

Smith, R. Chemical process: Design and integration, Second edition. Wiley; 2016.Google Scholar

Warikoo, V, Godawat, R, Brower, K, Jain, S, Cummings, D, Simons, E, et al. Integrated continuous production of recombinant therapeutic proteins. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2012; 109(12): 3018–3029.Google Scholar

Godawat, R, Konstantinov, K, Rohani, M, Warikoo, V. End-to-end integrated fully continuous production of recombinant monoclonal antibodies. J Biotechnol. 2015; 213: 13–19.Google Scholar

Steinebach, F, Ulmer, N, Wolf, M, Decker, L, Schneider, V, Wälchli, R, et al. Design and operation of a continuous integrated monoclonal antibody production process. Biotechnol Prog. 2017; 33(5): 1303–1313.Google Scholar

Gomes, J, Chopda, VR, Rathore, AS. Integrating systems analysis and control for implementing process analytical technology in bioprocess development. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2015; 90(4): 583–589.Google Scholar

Jiang, M, Severson, KA, Love, JC, Madden, H, Swann, P, Zang, L, et al. Opportunities and challenges of real-time release testing in biopharmaceutical manufacturing. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2017; 114(11): 2445–2456.Google Scholar

Rögner, M. Size exclusion chromatography. In: Michael, K, editor. Protein liquid chromatography. Volume 61 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 2000. p. 89–145.Google Scholar

Carpenter, JF, Randolph, TW, Jiskoot, W, Crommelin, DJ, Middaugh, CR, Winter, G. Potential inaccurate quantitation and sizing of protein aggregates by size exclusion chromatography: Essential need to use orthogonal methods to assure the quality of therapeutic protein products. J Pharm Sci. 2010; 99(5): 2200–2208.Google Scholar

Arakawa, T, Ejima, D, Li, T, Philo, JS. The critical role of mobile phase composition in size exclusion chromatography of protein pharmaceuticals. J Pharm Sci. 2010; 99(4): 1674– 1692.Google Scholar

Jacob, LR. Hydrophobic interaction chromatography. In: Michael, K, editor. Protein liquid chromatography. Volume 61 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 2000. p. 235–269.Google Scholar

Schlüter, H. Reversed-phase chromatography. In: Michael, K, editor. Protein liquid chromatography. Volume 61 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 2000. p. 147–234.Google Scholar

Helfferich, FG. Ion exchange. Courier Corporation; 1962.Google Scholar

Roos, PH. Ion exchange chromatography. In: Michael, K, editor. Protein liquid chromatography. Volume 61 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 2000. p. 3–88.Google Scholar

Haddad, PR, Jackson, PE. Ion-exclusion chromatography. In: Haddad, PR, Jackson, PE, editors. Ion chromatography – Principles and applications. Volume 46 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 1990. p. 195–222.Google Scholar

Fritz, JS. Principles and applications of ion-exclusion chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 1991; 546: 111–118.Google Scholar

Starkenstein, E. Über Fermentwirkung und deren Beeinflussung durch Neutralsalze. Biochem Z. 1910; 24: 210.Google Scholar

Cuatrecasas, P, Wilchek, M. Single-step purification of avidin from egg white by affinity chromatography on biocytin-Sepharose columns. Biochem Biophys Res Co. 1968; 33(2): 235–239.Google Scholar

Grönwall, C, Ståhl, S. Engineered affinity proteins – Generation and applications. J Biotechnol. 2009; 140(34): 254–269.Google Scholar

Kastner, M. Immobilized metal ion affinity chromatography. In: Michael, K, editor. Protein liquid chromatography. Volume 61 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 2000. p. 301–383.Google Scholar

Cheung, RCF, Wong, JH, Ng, TB. Immobilized metal ion affinity chromatography: A review on its applications. Applied Microbiol Biot. 2012; 96(6): 1411–1420.Google Scholar

Block, H, Maertens, B, Spriestersbach, A, Brinker, N, Kubicek, J, Fabis, R, et al. Immobilized-metal affinity chromatography (IMAC): A review. Methods in enzymology. 2009; 463: 439–473.Google Scholar

Feldman, PA, Bradbury, PI, Williams, JD, Sims, GE, McPhee, JW, Pinnell, MA, et al. Large-scale preparation and biochemical characterization of a new high purity factor IX concentrate prepared by metal chelate affinity chromatography. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 1994; 5(6): 939–948.Google Scholar

Barros de Genaro, AC, Tamagawa, RE, Azzoni, AR, Alves Bueno, SM, Miranda, EA. Recovery and purification of aprotinin from industrial insulin-processing effluent by immobilized chymotrypsin and negative IMAC chromatographies. Process Biochem. 2002; 37(12): 1413–1420.Google Scholar

Yang, Y, Geng, X. Mixed-mode chromatography and its applications to biopolymers. J Chromatogr A. 2011; 1218(49): 8813–8825.Google Scholar

Zhang, K, Liu, X. Mixed-mode chromatography in pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical applications. J Pharmaceut Biomed. 2016; 128: 73–88.Google Scholar

Zhao, G, Dong, XY, Sun, Y. Ligands for mixed-mode protein chromatography: Principles, characteristics and design. J Biotechnol. 2009; 144(1): 3–11.Google Scholar

Khalaf, R, Forrer, N, Buffolino, G, Butt, A, Morbidelli, M. Model-based description of peptide retention on doped reversed-phase media. J Chromatogr A. 2015; 1407: 169–175.Google Scholar

Deppert, WR, Lukačin, R. Hydroxyapatite chromatography. In: Michael, K, editor. Protein liquid chromatography. Volume 61 of Journal of chromatography library. Elsevier; 2000. p. 271–299.Google Scholar

[154] Cummings, LJ, Snyder, MA, Brisack, K. Protein chromatography on hydroxyapatite columns. In: Richard, RB, Murray, PD, editors. Methods in enzymology. Volume 463. Academic Press; 2009. p. 387–404.Google Scholar

Kaleas, KA, Schmelzer, CH, Pizarro, SA. Industrial case study: Evaluation of a mixed-mode resin for selective capture of a human growth factor recombinantly expressed in E. coli. J Chromatogr A. 2010; 1217(2): 235–242.Google Scholar

Pezzini, J, Joucla, G, Gantier, R, Toueille, M, Lomenech, AM, Le Sénéchal, C, et al. Antibody capture by mixed-mode chromatography: A comprehensive study from determination of optimal purification conditions to identification of contaminating host cell proteins. J Chromatogr A. 2011; 1218(45): 8197–8208.Google Scholar

Hilbrig, F, Freitag, R. Isolation and purification of recombinant proteins, antibodies and plasmid DNA with hydroxyapatite chromatography. Biotechnol J. 2012; 7(1): 90–102.Google Scholar

Nicoud, RM. Chromatographic processes: Modeling, simulation and design. Cambridge University Press; 2015.Google Scholar

Schmidt-Traub, H, Schulte, M, Seidel-Morgenstern A. Preparative chromatography. John Wiley & Sons; 2012.Google Scholar

Guiochon, G, Felinger, A, Shirazi, DG, Katti, A. Fundamentals of preparative and nonlinear chromatography. Second edition. Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar

Ruthven, DM. Principles of adsorption and adsorption processes. John Wiley & Sons; 1984.Google Scholar

Gu, T, Tsai, GJ, Tsao, G. Modeling of nonlinear multicomponent chromatography. Adv Biochem Eng Biot. 1993; 49: 45–71.Google Scholar

DeGroot, MH. A conversation with George Box. Stat Sci. 1987; 2(3): 239–258.Google Scholar

Coquebert de Neuville, B, Tarafder, A, Morbidelli, M. Distributed pore model for bio-molecule chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2013; 1298: 26–34.Google Scholar

Stickel, JJ, Fotopoulos, A. Pressure-flow relationships for packed beds of compressible chromatography media at laboratory and production Scale. Biotechnol Prog. 2001; 17(4): 744–751.Google Scholar

Flodin, P. Methodological aspects of gel filtration with special reference to desalting operations. J Chromatogr A. 1961; 5(2): 103–115.Google Scholar

Hagel, L. Gel filtration: Size exclusion chromatography. In: Janson, JC, editor. Protein purification: Principles, high resolution methods, and applications. Third edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2011. p. 51–91.Google Scholar

DePhillips, P, Lenhoff, AM. Pore size distributions of cation-exchange adsorbents determined by inverse size-exclusion chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2000; 883(1–2): 39–54.Google Scholar

Kuga, S. Pore-size distribution analyis of gel substances by size exclusion chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 1981; 206(3): 449–461.Google Scholar

Giddings, JC, Kucera, E, Russell, CP, Myers, MN. Statistical theory for the equilibrium distribution of rigid molecules in inert porous networks. Exclusion chromatography. J Phys Chem. 1968; 72(13): 4397–4408.Google Scholar

Knox, JH, Scott, HP. Theoretical-models for size-exclusion chromatography and calculation of pore-size distribution from size exclusion chromatography data. J Chromatogr A. 1984; 316(DEC): 311–332.Google Scholar

Kvaalen, E, Tondeur, D. Constraints on phase equilibrium equations. Chem Eng Sci. 1988; 43(4): 803–810.Google Scholar

Kopaciewicz, W, Rounds, MA, Fausnaugh, J, Regnier, FE. Second international symposium on high-performance liquid chromatography of proteins, peptides and polynucleotides retention model for high-performance ion-exchange chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 1983; 266: 3–21.Google Scholar

Brooks, CA, Cramer, SM. Steric mass-action ion exchange – Displacement profiles and induced salt gradients. AICHe J. 1992; 38(12): 1969–1978.Google Scholar

Hunter, AK, Carta, G. Protein adsorption on novel acrylamido-based polymeric ion-exchangers I. Morphology and equilibrium adsorption. J Chromatogr A. 2000; 897(1–2): 65–80.Google Scholar

Mollerup, JM. The thermodynamic principles of ligand binding in chromatography and biology. J Biotechnol. 2007; 132(2): 187–195.Google Scholar

Mollerup, JM. A review of the thermodynamics of protein association to ligands, protein adsorption, and adsorption isotherms. Chem Eng Technol. 2008; 31(6): 864–874.Google Scholar

Poole, CF, Schuette, SA. Contemporary practice of chromatography. Elsevier; 1984.Google Scholar

Melander, W, Horvath, C. Salt effects on hydrophobic interactions in precipitation and chromatography of proteins – Interpretation of lyotropic series. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1977; 183(1): 200–215.Google Scholar

Danckwerts, PV. Continuous flow systems. Chem Eng Sci. 1953; 2(1): 1–13.Google Scholar

Martin, AJP, Synge, RLM. A new form of chromatogram employing two liquid phases: A theory of chromatography. 2. Application to the micro-determination of the higher monoamino-acids in proteins. Biochem J. 1941; 35(12): 1358–1368.Google Scholar

Kozeny, J. Uber kapillare Leitung der Wasser in Boden. Sitzungsber Akad Wiss Wien. 1927; 136: 271–306.Google Scholar

Carman, PC. Fluid flow through granular beds. Trans Ins Chem Eng. 1937; 15: 150–167.Google Scholar

Taylor, R, Krishna, R. Multicomponent mass transfer. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1993.Google Scholar

Krishna, R, Wesselingh, J. The Maxwell–Stefan approach to mass transfer. Chem Eng Sci. 1997; 52(6): 861–911.Google Scholar

Wakao, N, Funazkri, T. Effect of fluid dispersion coefficients on particle-to-fluid mass transfer coefficients in packed beds. Chem Eng Sci. 1978; 33(10): 1375–1384.Google Scholar

Carberry, JJ. A boundary-layer model of fluid-particle mass transfer in fixed beds. AIChE J. 1960; 6(3): 460–463.Google Scholar

Wilson, EJ, Geankoplis, CJ. Liquid mass transfer at very low Reynolds numbers in packed beds. Ind Eng Chem Fund. 1966; 5(1): 9–14.Google Scholar

Einstein, A. Über die von der molekularkinetischen Theorie der Wärme geforderte Bewe-gung von in ruhenden Flüssigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen. Ann d Physik. 1905; 322(8): 549–560.Google Scholar

Polson, A. The some aspects of diffusion in solution and a definition of a colloidal particle. J Phys Colloid Chem. 1950; 54(5): 649–652.Google Scholar

Wang, CK, Northfield, SE, Swedberg, JE, Harvey, PJ, Mathiowetz, AM, Price, DA, et al. Translational diffusion of cyclic peptides measured using pulsed-field gradient NMR. J Phys Chem B. 2014; 118(38): 11129–11136.Google Scholar

García De La Torre, J, Huertas, ML, Carrasco, B. Calculation of hydrodynamic properties of globular proteins from their atomic-level structure. Biophys J. 2000; 78(2): 719–730.Google Scholar

Flury, M, Gimmi, TF. Solute diffusion. In: Dane, HD, Topp, CG, editors. Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 – physical methods. vol. 5 of Soil science society of America book series. Soil Science Society of America; 2002. p. 1323–1351.Google Scholar

Cunningham, AB, Lennox, JE, Ross, RJ. Biofilm: The hypertextbook. National Science Foundation; 2011.Google Scholar

van Deemter, JJ, Zuiderweg, FJ, Klinkenberg, A. Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography. Chem Eng Sci. 1956; 5(6): 271–289.Google Scholar

Carta, G, Ubiera, AR, Pabst, TM. Protein mass transfer kinetics in ion exchange media: Measurements and interpretations. Chem Eng Technol. 2005; 28(11): 1252–1264.Google Scholar

Carta, G, Rodrigues, AE. Diffusion and convection in chromatographic processes using permeable supports with a bidisperse pore structure. Chem Eng Sci. 1993; 48(23): 3927– 3935.Google Scholar

Rodrigues, AE. Permeable packings and perfusion chromatography in protein separation. J Chromatogr B Biomed Sci Appl. 1997; 699(1–2): 47–61.Google Scholar

Wu, Y, Abraham, D, Carta, G. Particle size effects on protein and virus-like particle adsorption on perfusion chromatography media. J Chromatogr A. 2015; 1375: 92–100.Google Scholar

Wu, Y, Simons, J, Hooson, S, Abraham, D, Carta, G. Protein and virus-like particle adsorption on perfusion chromatography media. J Chromatogr A. 2013; 1297: 96–105.Google Scholar

Coquebert de Neuville, B, Lamprou, A, Morbidelli, M, Soos, M. Perfusive ion-exchange chromatographic materials with high capacity. J Chromatogr A. 2014; 1374: 180–188.Google Scholar

Hahn, R, Bauerhansl, P, Shimahara, K, Wizniewski, C, Tscheliessnig, A, Jungbauer, A. Comparison of protein A affinity sorbents: II. Mass transfer properties. J Chromatogr A. 2005; 1093(12): 98–110.Google Scholar

Nfor, BK, Noverraz, M, Chilamkurthi, S, Verhaert, PDEM, van der Wielen, LAM, Ottens, M. High-throughput isotherm determination and thermodynamic modeling of protein adsorption on mixed mode adsorbents. J Chromatogr A. 2010; 1217(44): 6829–6850.Google Scholar

Pakiman, N, Isa, NH, Abol Hassan, MA, Walter, JK, Abdullah, N. Comparison of binding capacity and affinity of monoclonal antibody towards different affinity resins using high-throughput chromatography method. J Appl Sci. 2012; 12(11): 1136.Google Scholar

Baur, D, Angarita, M, Müller-Späth, T, Morbidelli, M. Optimal model-based design of the twin-column CaptureSMB process improves capacity utilization and productivity in protein A affinity capture. Biotechnol J. 2016; 11(1): 135–145.Google Scholar

Melter, L, Ströhlein, G, Butté, A, Morbidelli, M. Adsorption of monoclonal antibody variants on analytical cation-exchange resin. J Chromatogr A. 2007; 1154(12): 121–131.Google Scholar

Yamamoto, S, Nakanishi, K, Matsuno, R. Ion-exchange chromatography of proteins. vol. 43 of Chromatographic Science; 1988.Google Scholar

Ishihara, T, Kadoya, T, Yamamoto, S. Application of a chromatography model with linear gradient elution experimental data to the rapid scale-up in ion-exchange process chromatography of proteins. J Chromatogr A. 2007; 1162(1): 34–40.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Steinebach, F, Morbidelli, M. Linear isotherm determination from linear gradient elution experiments. J Chromatogr A. 2015; 1375: 33–41.Google Scholar

Vajda, J, Conze, W, Muller, E. Kinetic plots in aqueous size exclusion chromatography of monoclonal antibodies and virus particles. J Chromatogr A. 2015; 1426: 118–125.Google Scholar

Schmidt-Nielsen, K. Countercurrent systems in animals. Sci Am. 1981; 244(5): 118–129.Google Scholar

Gottschalk, CW, Mylle, M. Micropuncture study of the mammalian urinary concentrating mechanism: Evidence for the countercurrent hypothesis. Am J Physiol-Legacy Content. 1959; 196(4): 927–936.Google Scholar

Midtgård, U. The rete tibiotarsale and arteriovenous association in the hind limb of birds: A compartive morphological study on countercurrent heat exchange systems. Acta Zool. 1981; 62(2): 67–87.Google Scholar

Taylor, CR, Lyman, CP. Heat storage in running antelopes: Independence of brain and body temperatures. Am J Physiol-Legacy Content. 1972; 222(1): 114–117.Google Scholar

Biegler, LT, Grossman, IE, Westerberg AW. Systematic methods of chemical process design. Prentice Hall; 1997.Google Scholar

Ruthven, DM, Ching, CB. Counter-current and simulated counter-current adsorption separation processes. Chem Eng Sci. 1989; 44(5): 1011–1038.Google Scholar

Migliorini, C, Mazzotti, M, Morbidelli, M. Continuous chromatographic separation through simulated moving beds under linear and nonlinear conditions. J Chromatogr A. 1998; 827(2): 161–173.Google Scholar

Mazzotti, M, Storti, G, Morbidelli, M. Optimal operation of simulated moving bed units for nonlinear chromatographic separations. J Chromatogr A. 1997; 769(1): 3–24.Google Scholar

Berg, C. The hypersorption process for gas fractionation. The Hague; 1951. Third World Petroleum Congress.Google Scholar

Rodrigues, AE. Simulated moving bed technology. Principles, design and process applications. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2015.Google Scholar

Mazzotti, M. Equilibrium theory based design of simulated moving bed processes for a generalized Langmuir isotherm. J Chromatogr A. 2006; 1126(1–2): 311–322.Google Scholar

Mazzotti, M. Design of simulated moving bed separations: Generalized Langmuir isotherm. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2006; 45(18): 6311–6324.Google Scholar

Ma, Z, Wang, NHL. Standing wave analysis of SMB chromatography: Linear systems. AIChE J. 1997; 43(10): 2488–2508.Google Scholar

Xie, Y, Wu, D, Ma, Z, Wang, NHL. Extended standing wave design method for simulated moving bed chromatography: Linear systems. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2000; 39(6): 1993–2005.Google Scholar

Mallmann, T, Burris, BD, Ma, Z, Wang, NHL. Standing wave design of nonlinear SMB systems for fructose purification. AIChE J. 1998; 44(12): 2628–2646.Google Scholar

Siitonen, J, Sainio, T. Unified design of chromatographic separation processes. Chem Eng Sci. 2015; 122: 436–451.Google Scholar

Charton, F, Nicoud, RM. Complete design of a simulated moving bed. J Chromatogr A. 1995; 702(1): 97–112.Google Scholar

Biressi, G, Ludemann-Hombourger, O, Mazzotti, M, Nicoud, RM, Morbidelli, M. Design and optimisation of a simulated moving bed unit: Role of deviations from equilibrium theory. J Chromatogr A. 2000; 876(1): 3–15.Google Scholar

David, L, Yun, J, Nicoud, RM. Comparing multi-column chromatographic processes for purifying monosaccharides part I: A simplified approach. Adsorption. 2017; p. 577–591.Google Scholar

Shukla, AA, Hinckley, P. Host cell protein clearance during protein A chromatography: Development of an improved column wash step. Biotechnol Prog. 2008; 24(5): 1115–1121.Google Scholar

Nogal, B, Chhiba, K, Emery, JC. Select host cell proteins coelute with monoclonal antibodies in protein A chromatography. Biotechnol Prog. 2012; 28(2): 454–458.Google Scholar

Hahn, R, Schlegel, R, Jungbauer, A. Comparison of protein A affinity sorbents. J Chromatogr B. 2003; 790(1): 35–51.Google Scholar

Perez-Almodovar, EX, Carta, G. IgG adsorption on a new protein A adsorbent based on macroporous hydrophilic polymers. I. Adsorption equilibrium and kinetics. J Chromatogr A. 2009; 1216(47): 8339–8347.Google Scholar

Urh, M, Simpson, D, Zhao, K. Affinity chromatography: General methods. In: Richard, RB, Murray, PD, editors. Methods in enzymology. Volume 463. Academic Press; 2009. p. 417– 438.Google Scholar

Wrzosek, K, Gramblička, M, Tóthová, D, Antošová, M, Polakovič, M. Impact of ionic strength on adsorption capacity of chromatographic particles employed in separation of monoclonal antibodies. Chem Pap. 2010; 64(4): 461–468.Google Scholar

Gramblička, M, Tóthová, D, Antošová, M, Polakovič, M. Influence of pH on adsorption of human immunoglobulin gamma, human serum albumin and horse myoglobin by commercial chromatographic materials designed for downstream processing of monoclonal antibodies. Acta Chimica Slovaca. 2008; 1(1): 85–94.Google Scholar

Shalliker, RA, Catchpoole, HJ, Dennis, GR, Guiochon, G. Visualising viscous fingering in chromatography columns: High viscosity solute plug. J Chromatogr A. 2007; 1142(1): 48–55.Google Scholar

Stone, MC, Carta, G. Patterns of protein adsorption in chromatographic particles visualized by optical microscopy. J Chromatogr A. 2007; 1160(1–2): 206–214.Google Scholar

Tao, Y, Carta, G. Rapid monoclonal antibody adsorption on dextran-grafted agarose media for ion-exchange chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2008; 1211(1–2): 70–79.Google Scholar

Zhu, M, Carta, G. Protein adsorption equilibrium and kinetics in multimodal cation exchange resins. Adsorption. 2016; 22(2): 165–179.Google Scholar

Spahn, H, Schlünder, EU. The scale-up of activated carbon columns for water purification, based on results from batch tests – I: Theoretical and experimental determination of adsorption rates of single organic solutes in batch tests. Chem Eng Sci. 1975; 30(5): 529–537.Google Scholar

Steinebach, F, Angarita, M, Karst, DJ, Müller-Späth, T, Morbidelli, M. Model based adaptive control of a continuous capture process for monoclonal antibodies production. J Chromatogr A. 2016; 1444: 50–56.Google Scholar

Angarita, M, Müller-Späth, T, Baur, D, Lievrouw, R, Lissens, G, Morbidelli, M. Twin-column CaptureSMB: A novel cyclic process for protein A affinity chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2015; 1389: 85–95.Google Scholar

Gottschlich, N, Kasche, V. Purification of monoclonal antibodies by simulated moving-bed chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 1997; 765(2): 201–206.Google Scholar

Bryntesson, M, Hall, M, Lacki, K, inventors; Chromatography method. WO 2008153472 A1; 2008, filing date.Google Scholar

Mierendorf, R, Paaren, H, Grabski, A, Wilke, A, Baier, J, Oroskar, A, inventors; Continuous Isocratic Affinity Chromatography. US20080053901 A1; 2007, filing date.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Aumann, L, Ströhlein, G, Bavand, M, inventors; Method for identification and purification of multi-specific polypeptides. EP 2500073 A1; 2011, filing date.Google Scholar

Ransohoff, TC, Bisschops, MAT, inventors; Continuous processing methods for biological products. WO 2012078677 A3; 2011, filing date.Google Scholar

Valery, E, Morey, C, inventors; Method and device for separating fractions of a mixture. WO 2007101944 A2; 2007, filing date.Google Scholar

Gjoka, X, Rogler, K, Martino, RA, Gantier, R, Schofield, M. A straightforward methodology for designing continuous monoclonal antibody capture multi-column chromatography processes. J Chromatogr A. 2015; 1416: 38–46.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, David, L, Holzer, M, Nicoud, RM. Designing affinity chromatographic processes for the capture of antibodies. Part I: A simplified approach. J Chromatogr A. 2017; 1494: 27–39.Google Scholar

Angelo, J, Pagano, J, Müller-Späth, T, Mihlbacher, K, Chollangi, S, Xu, X, et al. Scale-up of twin-column periodic counter-current chromatography for mAb purification. BioProcess International. 2018; 16(4).Google Scholar

Baur, D, Angarita, M, Müller-Späth, T, Steinebach, F, Morbidelli, M. Comparison of batch and continuous multicolumn protein A capture processes by optimal design. Biotechnol J. 2016; 11: 920–931.Google Scholar

Ng, CK, Osuna-Sanchez, H, Valéry, E, Sørensen, E, Bracewell, DG. Design of high productivity antibody capture by protein A chromatography using an integrated experimental and modeling approach. J Chromatogr B. 2012; 899: 116–126.Google Scholar

Ng, CK, Rousset, F, Valéry, E, Bracewell, DG, Sørensen, E. Design of high productivity sequential multi-column chromatography for antibody capture. Food Bioprod Process. 2014; 92(2): 233–241.Google Scholar

Corriou, JP. Process control: Theory and applications. Springer; 2004.Google Scholar

Bequette, BW. Process control: Modeling, design and simulation. Prentice Hall; 2003.Google Scholar

Engell, S, Toumi, A. Optimisation and control of chromatography. Comp Chem Eng. 2005; 29(6): 1243–1252.Google Scholar

Morari, M, Zafiriou E. Robust process control. Prentice Hall; 1989.Google Scholar

Borrelli, F, Bemporad, A, Morari M. Predictive control for linear and hybrid systems. Cambridge University Press; 2017.Google Scholar

Karst, DJ, Steinebach, F, Soos, M, Morbidelli, M. Process performance and product quality in an integrated continuous antibody production process. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2017; 114(2): 298–307.Google Scholar

Mathiasson, L, Åkerblom, A, Skoglar, H, Blom, H, Ła̧cki, K. The use of dynamic control in periodic counter-current chromatography. GE Healthcare Life Sciences; 2015.Google Scholar

Chromacon. Contichrom Twin-column FPLC Chromatography. Process Control and Optimization by AutomAb; 2016.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Ulmer, N, Aumann, L, Ströhlein, G, Bavand, M. Automated process development and control of a twin-column counter-current process (CaptureSMB) for affinity capture. Prep Symposium. Boston; 2014.Google Scholar

Gottschalk, U. Process scale purification of antibodies. John Wiley & Sons; 2011.Google Scholar

Kelley, BD, Tobler, SA, Brown, P, Coffman, JL, Godavarti, R, Iskra, T, et al. Weak partitioning chromatography for anion exchange purification of monoclonal antibodies. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2008; 101(3): 553–566.Google Scholar

Fahrner, RL, Lester, PM, Blank, GS, Reifsnyder, DH. Non-flammable preparative reversed-phase liquid chromatography of recombinant human insulin-like growth factor-I. J Chromatogr A. 1999; 830(1): 127–134.Google Scholar

Garke, G, Hartmann, R, Papamichael, N, Deckwer, WD, Anspach, F. The influence of protein size on adsorption kinetics and equilibria in ion-exchange chromatography. Sep Sci Technol. 1999; 34(13): 2521–2538.Google Scholar

Walton, KS, Sholl, DS. Predicting multicomponent adsorption: 50 years of the ideal adsorbed solution theory. AIChE J. 2015; 61(9): 2757–2762.Google Scholar

Myers, A, Prausnitz, JM. Thermodynamics of mixed-gas adsorption. AIChE J. 1965; 11(1): 121–127.Google Scholar

Radke, CJ, Prausnitz, JM. Thermodynamics of multi-solute adsorption from dilute liquid solutions. AIChE J. 1972; 18(4): 761–768.Google Scholar

Guélat, B, Ströhlein, G, Lattuada, M, Morbidelli, M. Electrostatic model for protein adsorption in ion-exchange chromatography and application to monoclonal antibodies, lysozyme and chymotrypsinogen A. J Chromatogr A. 2010; 1217(35): 5610–5621.Google Scholar

Guélat, B, Khalaf, R, Lattuada, M, Costioli, M, Morbidelli, M. Protein adsorption on ion exchange resins and monoclonal antibody charge variant modulation. J Chromatogr A. 2016; 1447: 82–91.Google Scholar

Guélat, B, Ströhlein, G, Lattuada, M, Delegrange, L, Valax, P, Morbidelli, M. Simulation model for overloaded monoclonal antibody variants separations in ion-exchange chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2012; 1253: 32–43.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Morbidelli, M, Nicoud, RM. A continuum theory for multicomponent chromatography modeling. J Chromatogr A. 2016; 1446: 50–58.Google Scholar

Carta, G, Lewus, RK. Film model approximation for multicomponent adsorption. Adsorption. 2000; 6(1): 5–13.Google Scholar

Tao, Y, Chen, N, Carta, G, Ferreira, G, Robbins, D. Modeling multicomponent adsorption of monoclonal antibody charge variants in cation exchange columns. AIChE J. 2012; 58(8): 2503–2511.Google Scholar

Forrer, N, Butte, A, Morbidelli, M. Chromatographic behavior of a polyclonal antibody mixture on a strong cation exchanger column. Part I: Adsorption characterization. J Chromatogr A. 2008; 1214(1–2): 59–70.Google Scholar

Forrer, N, Butte, A, Morbidelli, M. Chromatographic behavior of a polyclonal antibody mixture on a strong cation exchanger column. Part II: Adsorption modelling. J Chromatogr A. 2008; 1214(1–2): 71–80.Google Scholar

Nicoud, RM, Clavier, JY, Perrut, M. Preparative SFC: Basics and applications. In: Caude M, Thiébaut D, editors. Practical supercritical fluid chromatography and extraction. vol. 2; 1999. p. 397.Google Scholar

Mazzotti, M, Storti, G, Morbidelli, M. Supercritical fluid simulated moving bed chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 1997; 786(2): 309–320.Google Scholar

Jensen, TB, Billiet, HAH, Van, DWLAM, inventors; Method of substantially continuously separating two compounds using a moving bed or a simulated moving bed. WO2000033934 A1; 1999, filing date.Google Scholar

Abel, S, Mazzotti, M, Morbidelli, M. Solvent gradient operation of simulated moving beds: II. Langmuir isotherms. J Chromatogr B. 2004; 1026(1): 47–55.Google Scholar

Keßler, LC, Gueorguieva, L, Rinas, U, Seidel-Morgenstern, A. Step gradients in 3-zone simulated moving bed chromatography: Application to the purification of antibodies and bone morphogenetic protein-2. J Chromatogr A. 2007; 1176(12): 69–78.Google Scholar

Martínez Cristancho, CA, Seidel-Morgenstern, A. Purification of single-chain antibody fragments exploiting pH-gradients in simulated moving bed chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2016; 1434: 29–38.Google Scholar

Song, SM, Kim, IH. A three-zone simulated moving-bed for separation of immunoglobulin Y. Korean J Chem Eng. 2013; 30(8): 1527–1532.Google Scholar

Li, P, Xiu, G, Rodrigues, AE. Proteins separation and purification by salt gradient ion-exchange SMB. AIChE J. 2007; 53(9): 2419–2431.Google Scholar

Seidel-Morgenstern, A, Keßler, LC, Kaspereit, M. New developments in simulated moving bed chromatography. Chem Eng Technol. 2008; 31(6): 826–837.Google Scholar

Agrawal, G, Kawajiri, Y. Comparison of various ternary simulated moving bed separation schemes by multi-objective optimization. J Chromatogr A. 2012; 1238: 105–113.Google Scholar

Nicolaos, A, Muhr, L, Gotteland, P, Nicoud, RM, Bailly, M. Application of equilibrium theory to ternary moving bed configurations (four+four, five+four, eight and nine zones): I. Linear case. J Chromatogr A. 2001; 908(12): 71–86.Google Scholar

Xie, Y, Mun, S, Chin, CY, Wang, NHL. Simulated moving bed technologies for producing high purity biochemicals and pharmaceuticals. In: Hwang, NHC, Woo, SLY, editors. Frontiers in Biomedical Engineering: Proceedings of the World Congress for Chinese Biomedical Engineers. Springer US; 2003. p. 507–527.Google Scholar

Xie, Y, Mun, S, Kim, J, Wang, NHL. Standing wave design and experimental validation of a tandem simulated moving bed process for insulin purification. Biotechnol Prog. 2002; 18(6): 1332–1344.Google Scholar

Voigt, U, Kinkel, J, Hempel, R, Nicoud, RM, inventors; Chromatographic process for obtaining highly purified cyclosporin A and related cyclosporins. US006306306B1; 1997, filing date.Google Scholar

Hotier, G, Toussaint, JM, Terneuil, G, Lonchamp, D, inventors; Continuous process and apparatus for chromatographic separation of a mixture of at least three constituents into three purified effluents using two solvents. US005093004A; 1990, filing date.Google Scholar

Abel, S, Bäbler, MU, Arpagaus, C, Mazzotti, M, Stadler, J. Two-fraction and three-fraction continuous simulated moving bed separation of nucleosides. J Chromatogr A. 2004; 1043(2): 201–210.Google Scholar

Paredes, G, Abel, S, Mazzotti, M, Morbidelli, M, Stadler, J. Analysis of a simulated moving bed operation for three-fraction separations (3F-SMB). Ind Eng Chem Res. 2004; 43(19): 6157–6167.Google Scholar

Wei, F, Li, M, Huang, F, Chen, M, Jiang, H, Zhao, Y. A novel pseudo simulated moving bed with solvent gradient for ternary separations. J Chromatogr A. 2011; 1218(20): 2906–2911.Google Scholar

Wei, F, Shen, B, Chen, M, Zhao, Y. Study on a pseudo-simulated moving bed with solvent gradient for ternary separations. J Chromatogr A. 2012; 1225: 99–106.Google Scholar

Aumann, L, Morbidelli, M. A continuous multi-column counter-current solvent gradient purification (MCSGP) process. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2007; 98(5): 1043–1055.Google Scholar

Aumann, L, Stroehlein, G, Morbidelli, M. Parametric study of a 6-column counter-current solvent gradient purification (MCSGP) unit. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2007; 98(5): 1029–1042.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Aumann, L, Morbidelli, M. Role of cleaning-in-place in the purification of mAb supernatants using continuous cation exchange chromatography. Sep Sci Technol. 2009; 44(1): 1–26.Google Scholar

Krättli, M, Müller-Späth, T, Morbidelli, M. Multifraction separation in counter-current chromatography (MCSGP). Biotechnol Bioeng. 2013; 110(9): 2436–2444.Google Scholar

Silva, RJS, Rodrigues, RCR, Osuna-Sanchez, H, Bailly, M, Valéry, E, Mota, JPB. A new multi-column, open-loop process for center-cut separation by solvent-gradient chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2010; 1217(52): 8257–8269.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Ströhlein, G, Aumann, L, Kornmann, H, Valax, P, Delegrange, L, et al. Model simulation and experimental verification of a cation-exchange IgG capture step in batch and continuous chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2011; 1218(31): 5195–5204.Google Scholar

Ströhlein, G, Aumann, L, Mazzotti, M, Morbidelli, M. A continuous, counter-current multi-column chromatographic process incorporating modifier gradients for ternary separations. J Chromatogr A. 2006; 1126(1): 338–346.Google Scholar

Steinebach, F, Krättli, M, Storti, G, Morbidelli, M. Equilibrium theory based design space for the multicolumn countercurrent solvent gradient purification process. Indus Eng Chem Res. 2017; 56(45): 13482–13489.Google Scholar

Aumann, L, Morbidelli, M. A semicontinuous 3-column counter-current solvent gradient purification (MCSGP) process. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2008; 99(3): 728–733.Google Scholar

Steinebach, F, Ulmer, N, Decker, L, Aumann, L, Morbidelli, M. Experimental design of a twin-column counter-current gradient purification process. J Chromatogr A. 2017; 1492: 19–26.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Krättli, M, Aumann, L, Ströhlein, G, Morbidelli, M. Increasing the activity of monoclonal antibody therapeutics by continuous chromatography (MCSGP). Biotechnol Bioeng. 2010; 107(4): 652–662.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Aumann, L, Melter, L, Ströhlein, G, Morbidelli, M. Chromatographic separation of three monoclonal antibody variants using multi-column counter-current solvent gradient purification (MCSGP). Biotechnol Bioeng. 2008; 100(6): 1166–1177.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Ströhlein, G, Lyngberg, O, Maclean, D. Enabling high purities and yields in therapeutic peptide purification using multicolumn countercurrent solvent gradient purification. Chim Oggi Chem Today. 2013; 31(5): 56–60.Google Scholar

Krättli, M, Steinebach, F, Morbidelli, M. Online control of the twin-column counter-current solvent gradient process for biochromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2013; 1293: 51–59.Google Scholar

Hendriks, LJA, de Kruif, J, Throsby, M, Bakker, ABH, Müller-Späth, T, Ulmer, N, et al. Purifying common light-chain bispecific antibodies. Bioprocess Int. 2013; 11(5): 36–45.Google Scholar

Müller-Späth, T, Aumann, L, Ströhlein, G, Kornmann, H, Valax, P, Delegrange, L, et al. Two step capture and purification of IgG2 using multi-column counter-current solvent gradient purification (MCSGP). Biotechnol Bioeng. 2010; 107(6): 974–984.Google Scholar

Ulmer, N, Steinebach, F, Morbidelli, M. Short course on continuous chromatography for biotherapeutics. Labcourse on the continuous purification of PEGylated lysozyme. ETH Zurich; 2015.Google Scholar

Erdem, G, Abel, S, Morari, M, Mazzotti, M, Morbidelli, M, Lee, JH. Automatic control of simulated moving beds. Indus Eng Chem Res. 2004; 43(2): 405–421.Google Scholar

Erdem, G, Abel, S, Morari, M, Mazzotti, M, Morbidelli, M. Automatic control of simulated moving beds II: Nonlinear isotherm. Indus Eng Chem Res. 2004; 43(14): 3895–3907.Google Scholar

Grossmann, C, Ströhlein, G, Morari, M, Morbidelli, M. Optimizing model predictive control of the chromatographic multi-column solvent gradient purification (MCSGP) process. J Process Contr. 2010; 20(5): 618–629.Google Scholar

Papathanasiou, MM, Avraamidou, S, Oberdieck, R, Mantalaris, A, Steinebach, F, Morbidelli, M, et al. Advanced control strategies for the multi-column counter-current solvent gradient purification process. AIChE J. 2016; 62(7): 2341–2357.Google Scholar

Birch, JR, Onakunle, Y. Biopharmaceutical proteins. vol. 308 of Therapeutic proteins. Humana Press; 2005.Google Scholar

Dembowsky, K, Stadler, P. Novel therapeutic proteins: Selected case studies. Wiley-VCH; 2001.Google Scholar

Farkaš, P, Bystrický, S. Chemical conjugation of biomacromolecules: A mini-review. Chemical Pap. 2010; 64(6): 683–695.Google Scholar

Shu, JY, Panganiban, B, Xu, T. Peptide-polymer conjugates: From fundamental science to application. Annu Rev Phys Chem. 2013; 64: 631–657.Google Scholar

Wong, SS. Chemistry of protein conjugation and cross-linking. CRC Press; 1991.Google Scholar

Kalia, J, Raines, RT. Advances in bioconjugation. Current Org Chem. 2010; 14(2): 138–147.Google Scholar

Dean, KM, Palmer, AE. Advances in fluorescence labeling strategies for dynamic cellular imaging. Nat Chem Biol. 2014; 10(7): 512–523.Google Scholar

Hermanson, GT. Bioconjugate techniques. Third edition. Academic Press; 2013.Google Scholar

Fee, CJ. Protein conjugates purification and characterization. In: PEGylated protein drugs: Basic science and clinical applications. Springer; 2009. p. 113–125.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Ulmer, N, Klaue, A, Ingold, O, Morbidelli, M. Modeling the kinetics of protein conjugation reactions. Chem Ing Tech. 2016; 88(11): 1598–1608.Google Scholar

Perez, HL, Cardarelli, PM, Deshpande, S, Gangwar, S, Schroeder, GM, Vite, GD, et al. Antibody-drug conjugates: Current status and future directions. Drug Discov Today. 2014; 19(7): 869–881.Google Scholar

Dozier, JK, Distefano, MD. Site-specific PEGylation of therapeutic proteins. Int J Mol Sci. 2015; 16(10): 25831–25864.Google Scholar

Schumacher, D, Hackenberger, CPR. More than add-on: Chemoselective reactions for the synthesis of functional peptides and proteins. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2014; 22: 62–69.Google Scholar

Veronese, FM, Mero, A, Pasut, G. Protein PEGylation, basic science and biological applications. In: PEGylated Protein Drugs: Basic Science and Clinical Applications. Springer; 2009. p. 11–31.Google Scholar

Brocchini, S, Balan, S, Godwin, A, Choi, JW, Zloh, M, Shaunak, S. PEGylation of native disulfide bonds in proteins. Nature Protoc. 2006; 1(5): 2241–2252.Google Scholar

Brocchini, S, Godwin, A, Balan, S, Choi, JW, Zloh, M, Shaunak, S. Disulfide bridge based PEGylation of proteins. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2008; 60(1): 3–12.Google Scholar

Fontana, A, Spolaore, B, Mero, A, Veronese, FM. Site-specific modification and PEGylation of pharmaceutical proteins mediated by transglutaminase. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2008; 60(1): 13–28.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Bourgeaux, E, Morbidelli, M. Kinetic modeling of protein PEGylation. Chem Eng Sci. 2015; 137: 816–827.Google Scholar

Fee, CJ, Van Alstine, JM. Prediction of the viscosity radius and the size exclusion chromatography behavior of PEGylated proteins. Bioconjugate Chem. 2004; 15(6): 1304–1313.Google Scholar

Birdsall, RE, Shion, H, Kotch, FW, Xu, A, Porter, TJ, Chen, W. A rapid on-line method for mass spectrometric confirmation of a cysteine-conjugated antibody-drug-conjugate structure using multidimensional chromatography. MAbs. 2015; 7(6): 1036–1044.Google Scholar

Le, LN, Moore, JM, Ouyang, J, Chen, X, Nguyen, MD, Galush, WJ. Profiling antibody drug conjugate positional isomers: A system-of-equations approach. Anal Chem. 2012; 84(17): 7479–7486.Google Scholar

Monkarsh, SP, Spence, C, Porter, JE, Palleroni, A, Nalin, C, Rosen, P, et al. Isolation of positional isomers of mono-poly(ethylene glycol)ylated interferon α-2a and the determination of their biochemical and biological characteristics. In: Harris, JL, Zalipsky, S, editors. Poly(ethylene glycol). Chemistry and biological applications. vol. 680 of ACS Symposium Series. American Chemical Society; 1997. p. 207–216.Google Scholar

Maiser, B, Kroner, F, Dismer, F, Brenner-Weiss, G, Hubbuch, J. Isoform separation and binding site determination of mono-PEGylated lysozyme with pH gradient chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2012; 1268: 102–108.Google Scholar

ATTO-TEC. Recommended procedures for labeling; 2016. Accessible from: https://www.atto-tec.com/.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Ingold, O, Morbidelli, M. Model-based development of an on-column PEGylation process. React Chem Eng. 2016; 1: 204–217.Google Scholar

Pfister, D, Morbidelli, M. Integrated process for high conversion and high yield protein PEGylation. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2016; 113(8): 1711–1718.Google Scholar

Wang, X, Hu, J, Pan, D, Teng, H, Xiu, Z. PEGylation kinetics of recombinant hirudin and its application for the production of PEGylated HV2 species. Biochem Eng J. 2014; 85: 38–48.Google Scholar

Turecek, PL, Bossard, MJ, Schoetens, F, Ivens, IA. PEGylation of biopharmaceuticals: A review of chemistry and nonclinical safety information of approved drugs. J Pharm Sci. 2016; 105(2): 460–475.Google Scholar

Grace, M, Youngster, S, Gitlin, G, Sydor, W, Xie, L, Westreich, L, et al. Structural and biologic characterization of pegylated recombinant IFN α-2b. J Interf Cytok Res. 2001; 21(12): 1103–1115.Google Scholar

Marcoux, J, Champion, T, Colas, O, Wagner-Rousset, E, Corva, N, Van Dorsselaer, A, et al. Native mass spectrometry and ion mobility characterization of trastuzumab emtansine, a lysine-linked antibody drug conjugate. Protein Sci. 2015; 24(8): 1210–1223.Google Scholar

Shen, BQ, Xu, K, Liu, L, Raab, H, Bhakta, S, Kenrick, M, et al. Conjugation site modulates the in vivo stability and therapeutic activity of antibody-drug conjugates. Nature Biotechnol. 2012; 30(2): 184–189.Google Scholar

Molek, J, Ruanjaikaen, K, Zydney, AL. Effect of electrostatic interactions on transmission of PEGylated proteins through charged ultrafiltration membranes. J Membrane Sci. 2010; 353(1–2): 60–69.Google Scholar

Molek, JR, Zydney, AL. Separation of PEGylated αLactalbumin from unreacted precursors and byproducts using ultrafiltration. Biotechnol Prog. 2007; 23(6): 1417–1424.Google Scholar

Ruanjaikaen, K, Zydney, AL. Purification of singly PEGylated α-lactalbumin using charged ultrafiltration membranes. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2011; 108(4): 822–829.Google Scholar

Rohrer, T. Consideration for the safe and effective manufacturing of antibody drug conjugates. Chem Oggi/Chem Today. 2012; 30: 76–79.Google Scholar

Zeman, LJ, Zydney, AL. Microfiltration and Ultrafiltration. Principles and Applications. Marcel Dekker; 1996.Google Scholar

Molek, KS. Ultrafiltration of PEGylated proteins. Pennsylvania State University; 2008.Google Scholar

Rodriguez-Aller, M, Guillarme, D, Beck, A, Fekete, S. Practical method development for the separation of monoclonal antibodies and antibody-drug-conjugate species in hydrophobic interaction chromatography. Part 1: Optimization of the mobile phase. J Pharmaceut Biomed. 2016; 118: 393–403.Google Scholar

Pfister, D. Processes for the production of PEGylated proteins. ETH Zurich; 2015.Google Scholar

Thayer, AM. Building antibody-drug conjugates. Chem Eng News. 2014; 92(3): 13–20.Google Scholar

Seely, JE, Richey, CW. Use of ion-exchange chromatography and hydrophobic interaction chromatography in the preparation and recovery of polyethylene glycol-linked proteins. J Chromatogr A. 2001; 908(1–2): 235–241.Google Scholar

Moosmann, A, Christel, J, Boettinger, H, Mueller, E. Analytical and preparative separation of PEGylated lysozyme for the characterization of chromatography media. J Chromatogr A. 2010; 1217(2): 209–215.Google Scholar

Maiser, B, Dismer, F, Hubbuch, J. Optimization of random PEGylation reactions by means of high throughput screening. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2014; 111(1): 104–114.Google Scholar

Moosmann, A, Blath, J, Lindner, R, Muller, E, Bottingert, H. Aldehyde PEGylation kinetics: A Standard protein versus a pharmaceutically relevant single chain variable fragment. Bioconjugate Chem. 2011; 22(8): 1545–1558.Google Scholar

Chavez, DM, Orpiszewski, J, inventors; Apparatuses and processes for increasing protein pegylation reaction yields. US20050089952 A1; 2004, filing date.Google Scholar

Rathore, A, Bhambure, R, Ghare, V. Process analytical technology (PAT) for biopharmaceutical products. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010; 398(1): 137–154.Google Scholar

Cromwell, MEM, Hilario, E, Jacobson, F. Protein aggregation and bioprocessing. AAPS J. 2006; 8(3): E572–E579.Google Scholar