Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Accepted Articles
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS
    • Terms of Use
  • About PDA JPST
    • JPST Editors and Editorial Board
    • About/Vision/Mission
    • Paper of the Year
  • Author & Reviewer Resources
    • Author Resources / Submit
    • Reviewer Resources
  • JPST Access and Subscriptions
    • PDA Members
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Nonmember Access
  • Support
    • Join PDA
    • Contact
    • Feedback
    • Advertising
    • CiteTrack
  • .
    • Visit PDA
    • PDA Letter
    • Technical Reports
    • news uPDATe
    • Bookstore

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology
  • .
    • Visit PDA
    • PDA Letter
    • Technical Reports
    • news uPDATe
    • Bookstore
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Accepted Articles
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS
    • Terms of Use
  • About PDA JPST
    • JPST Editors and Editorial Board
    • About/Vision/Mission
    • Paper of the Year
  • Author & Reviewer Resources
    • Author Resources / Submit
    • Reviewer Resources
  • JPST Access and Subscriptions
    • PDA Members
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Nonmember Access
  • Support
    • Join PDA
    • Contact
    • Feedback
    • Advertising
    • CiteTrack
  • Follow pda on Twitter
  • Visit PDA on LinkedIn
  • Visit pda on Facebook
Case ReportCase Studies

Multisite Qualification of an Automated Incubator and Colony Counter for Environmental and Bioburden Applications in Pharmaceutical Microbiology

Hans Joachim Anders, Daniel Männle, William Carpenter, Wolfgang Eder, Ivana Heckel, Tobias Götzen, Corinne Oechslin, Cedric Joossen, Maria Eugenia Giribets Parra, Jason Rose, Vaishali Shah and David L Jones
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology May 2023, 77 (3) 236-247; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5731/pdajpst.2022.012742
Hans Joachim Anders
1Novartis Pharma Stein AG, Stein CH4332, Switzerland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Männle
1Novartis Pharma Stein AG, Stein CH4332, Switzerland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William Carpenter
2Biogen, Durham, NC;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wolfgang Eder
3Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Nonnenwald 2, 82377 Penzberg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ivana Heckel
4Lonza, Visp, Valais, Switzerland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tobias Götzen
4Lonza, Visp, Valais, Switzerland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Corinne Oechslin
4Lonza, Visp, Valais, Switzerland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cedric Joossen
5Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria Eugenia Giribets Parra
6Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Biberach, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jason Rose
7GlaxoSmithKline, Upper Merion, PA;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vaishali Shah
8Kite Pharma, Santa Monica, CA; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David L Jones
9Rapid Micro Biosystems, Lowell, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: djones@rapidmicrobio.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Schematic of the detection of the autofluorescence of microcolonies. Top: Microorganisms fluoresce under blue light and their location on the membrane captured by the CCD detector. Middle: Images taken at 4-hour intervals and an increase in a fluorescent object size or brightness confirms a growing colony. Bottom: Accuracy of the system can be shown by comparison with human counts at the end of incubation.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    TTR curves for 5 pharmacopeial and 7 environmental organisms, namely Staphylococcus epidermidis, Micrococcus luteus, Kocuria rhizophila, Bacillus pumilus, Brevundimonas diminuta, Candida tropicalis, and Aspergillus fumigatus are incubated and imaged every 4 h for 72 h at 30°C–35°C. The cumulative percentage of emerging colonies is shown on the y axis.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table I

    The Media, Test Microorganisms, and Growth Direct® Incubation Temperature and Time at the Different Study Sites

    Site and MediaControl MicroorganismIncubation Temperature and time
    Company 1B. subtilis30°C–35°C for 36 hours
    TSAP. aeruginosa
    R2AC. albicans
    SDAA. brasiliensis
    TSA + LP80R. pickettii
    S. aureus
    S. epidermidis (in-house)
    Penicillium species (in-house)
    P. glucanolyticus (in-house)
    B. cereus/thuringiensis (in-house)
    Mixed culture
    Company 2B. subtilis22.5°C–27.5°C for 44 hours
    TSA + LP80A. brasiliensis
    E. coli
    Company 3B. subtilis30°C–35°C for 44 hours
    TSA + LP80A. brasiliensis
    E. coli
    S. aureus
    P. aeruginosa
    C. albicans
    Mixed culture
    In-house isolates
    Company 4B. subtilis28°C–32°C for 44 hours
    TSA + LP80A. brasiliensis
    E. coli
    Company 5EM:E. coliB. cepaciaEM:Water:
    TSA + LP80HTB. subtilis30°C–35°C for 44 hours
    A. brasiliensis
    R2AWater:
    E. coli
    Water:30°C–35°C for < 7 days
    B. cepacia
    Company 6S.aureus30°C–35°C for 44 hours
    TSA + LP80HTC. albicans
    S. hominis
    M. luteus
    C. tuberculostearicum
    B. subtilis
    A. brasiliensis
    E. coli
    P. aeruginosa
    Company 7B. subtilis30°C–35°C for 44 hours
    TSAA. brasiliensis
    R2AE. coli
    TSA + LP80HT
    Company 8B. subtilis30°C–35°C for 44 hours
    TSA + LP80A. brasiliensis
    R2AE. coli
    • View popup
    Table II

    Verification of the Equivalency of the Automated Plate Counter and Traditionally Read Plate Counts

    SiteB. subtilis ATCC 6633E. coli ATCC 8739A. brasiliensis ATCC 16404P. aeruginosa ATCC 9027S. aureus ATCC 6538C. albicans ATTC 10231
    Site 1PassPassPassPassPassPass
    Site 2PassPassPass
    Site 3PassPassPassPassPassPass
    Site 4PassPassPass
    Site 5PassPassPass
    Site 6PassPassPassPassPassPass
    Site 7PassPassPass
    Site 8PassPassPass
    • Note: Acceptance Specification: Growth Direct® Colony Count ≥85% of the mean colony count by 3 analysts. Organism colonial shape recorded in PQ to verify vision accuracy by site. Grayed cells indicate the organism was not tested during company PQ.

    • View popup
    Table III

    Determination of TTR. Acceptance Specification, Recovery ≥85% of the Visual Count for the Maximal Incubation Time

    Siteand MediaSystem Incubation Temperature and timeTime to ResultsComments
    Site 1 TSA R2A SDA TSA + LP80EM, water and product: 30°C–35°C for 72 to 120 hoursProduct: 36 hoursRinse Water 44 hours EM: 60 hoursMany species recovered >85% much earlier for EM but minimum times will be driven by worst case recovery organism(s)
    Site 2 TSA + LP80EM: 22.5°C–27.5°C for 120 hoursEM: 36 hours100% recovery at 72 hours Microorganisms included standard molds and bacteria and in-house molds and bacteria
    Site 3 TSA + LP80EM: 30°C–35°C for 120 hoursEM 44 hoursTTR is defined by ATCC strains, site-isolates, slow-growers, and heat-stressed organisms. Verified with real samples in routine
    Site 4R2ATSA + LP80TSAWater: 30°C–35°C for 144 hoursEM: 28°C–32°C for 120 hoursProduct: 30°C–35°C for 120 hoursWater: 116 hours EM: 76 hours Product: 52 hoursRepresentative purified water samples from site water loop Real air and surface samples from C/D/CNC areas pH stressed ATCC strains on phosphate buffer (without product matrix)
    Site 5 R2ATSA + LP80HTEM:25°C–30°C(surface and air monitoring)30°C–35°C(personnel monitoring)for 96 hoursWater:30°C–35°C for 164 hoursEM: 56 hours Water: 116 hoursMicroorganisms for EM TTR: environmental samples from surface, air and personnel monitoring Microorganisms for water TTR: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (in-house strain) Methylobacterium extorquens (in-house strain) Water samples of different quality
    Site 6 TSA + LP80HTEM: 25°C–30°C for 120 hoursEM: 72 hoursSite-isolates from air and surface monitoring
    Site 7TSA + LP80HTR2ATSAEM30°C–35°C for 168 hours Water 30°C–35°C for 120 hours Product 30°C–35°C for 120 hoursEM: 52 hours Water: 64 and 108 hours Product: 36 hoursWater TTR varies by facility flora.Bioburden used pH 4.0 stress method
    Site 8TSA + LP80R2AEM30°C–35°C for 72 hours Water 30°C–35°C for 100 hoursEM: 68 hours Water: 100 hoursMicroorganisms for WFI water TTR were each “stressed” per JP pharmacopeia: Pseudomonas protegens (ATCC 17386)Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (in-house strain) Methylobacterium extorquens (ATCC BAA-2500) Endogenous bacteria were used for purified water (PUW) and pretreatment water systems, using historically highest count sites based on annual trend reports. EM used typical 5 USP organisms plus 3 in-house organisms.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In This Issue

PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology: 77 (3)
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology
Vol. 77, Issue 3
May/June 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by Author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Multisite Qualification of an Automated Incubator and Colony Counter for Environmental and Bioburden Applications in Pharmaceutical Microbiology
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Multisite Qualification of an Automated Incubator and Colony Counter for Environmental and Bioburden Applications in Pharmaceutical Microbiology
Hans Joachim Anders, Daniel Männle, William Carpenter, Wolfgang Eder, Ivana Heckel, Tobias Götzen, Corinne Oechslin, Cedric Joossen, Maria Eugenia Giribets Parra, Jason Rose, Vaishali Shah, David L Jones
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology May 2023, 77 (3) 236-247; DOI: 10.5731/pdajpst.2022.012742

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Multisite Qualification of an Automated Incubator and Colony Counter for Environmental and Bioburden Applications in Pharmaceutical Microbiology
Hans Joachim Anders, Daniel Männle, William Carpenter, Wolfgang Eder, Ivana Heckel, Tobias Götzen, Corinne Oechslin, Cedric Joossen, Maria Eugenia Giribets Parra, Jason Rose, Vaishali Shah, David L Jones
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology May 2023, 77 (3) 236-247; DOI: 10.5731/pdajpst.2022.012742
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Technical Background of the Advanced Imaging System Used in the Automated Colony Counter
    • Regulatory and Compendial Guidance for the Qualification of Automated Methods
    • Validation Approaches
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Conflict of Interest Declaration
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Phase-Incremental Decision Trees for Multi-Phase Feature Selection and Interaction in Biologics Manufacturing
  • Practical Application of Setting up an Annual Contamination Control Strategy (CCS) Assessment
  • A Risk Assessment and Risk Based Approach Review of Pre-use/Post Sterilization Integrity Testing (PUPSIT)
Show more Case Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Automation
  • Colony Counter
  • Environmental Monitoring
  • Bioburden testing
  • Performance Qualification
  • Method validation
  • contact plate
  • Rapid Microbial Methods (RMMs)

Readers

  • About
  • Table of Content Alerts/Other Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • Terms of Use
  • Contact Editors

Author/Reviewer Information

  • Author Resources
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Reviewers
  • Contact Editors

Parenteral Drug Association, Inc.

  • About
  • Advertising/Sponsorships
  • Events
  • PDA Bookstore
  • Press Releases

© 2025 PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology Print ISSN: 1079-7440  Digital ISSN: 1948-2124

Powered by HighWire