Skip to main content

Adoption of rFC for bacterial endotoxin testing

bacterial endotoxin testing

Download the white paper: What is driving the adoption of rFC for bacterial endotoxin testing

Filename
Tipping point – what is driving the adoption of rFC for bacterial endotoxin testing.pdf
Size
1 MB
Format
application/pdf

Originally published in European Pharmaceutical Review

As industry leaders seek strategies to build supply chain resilience, multi-sourcing is driving the adoption of alternative solutions like rFC.

Over the last 20 years, the worldwide value of traded pharmaceutical goods has grown six-fold, from $113 billion in 2000 to $629 billion in 2019(1). Yet amid such robust growth comes risk to supply chain security as manufacturers become increasingly dependent on a global network of suppliers. In a recent McKinsey Global Institute survey, nearly 50 percent of respondents cited sole sourcing of inputs as a critical vulnerability – and 25 percent pointed to a lack of visibility of supplier risks(1).

One of the most common strategies for building resilience is to expand the network of suppliers for critical components or raw materials(1). As industry leaders seek strategies to build supply chain resilience, multi-sourcing is driving the adoption of alternative solutions, which in some cases puts industry one step ahead of regulators. Such is the case with alternative methods for  bacterial endotoxin testing (BET), which involves the development of recombinant reagents like Recombinant Factor C (rFC). 

With industry’s push to build a more diverse global supply chain, we find ourselves at a tipping point for the widespread adoption of alternative solutions like rFC — driven as much by industry, if not more, than regulators.

Finding common ground for sourcing

Both pharmaceutical companies and regulators have the same goal — ensuring continuous supply of safe drugs and therapies. Global pharmaceutical companies depend upon robust global supply chains to fulfil their endotoxin testing requirements to ensure patient safety. rFC is a safe, sustainable endotoxin testing solution that could mitigate many of the adverse trends impacting global supply chain consistency. However, the lack of compendial inclusion by the United States  Pharmacopoeia (USP) continues to be a barrier to widespread  implementation.

While this limitation mostly affects pharmaceutical companies in the US, the impact is global. In fact, even European users who enjoy the compendial status of rFC face challenges if they want to export their products outside of the EU because gaining regulatory approval in non-EU countries requires them to validate rFC as an alternative method. 

...

(1) Foster T, Patel P, Skiba K. Four ways pharma companies can make their supply chains more resilient. Pharmaceuticals & Medical Products Practice. McKinsey & Company. 2021.

Download the white paper: What is driving the adoption of rFC for bacterial endotoxin testing

Filename
Tipping point – what is driving the adoption of rFC for bacterial endotoxin testing.pdf
Size
1 MB
Format
application/pdf

Innovative Endotoxin Testing

Recombinant Factor C: Advanced Endotoxin Testing

Our endotoxin detection solutions are specifically designed to meet the need for quick, smart, and agile laboratory tools

WHITE PAPER

The Rising Tide of State-of-the-Art Automation - Endotoxin Testing

The Tecan Fluent® workstation has been paired with the bioMérieux ENDOZYME® II GO pre-coated plates to create a seamless automation solution for endotoxin testing.

WHITE PAPER

Bacterial Endotoxin Testing

Recombinant horseshoe crab Factor C (rFC) methods are the latest state-of-the-art solution for effective bacterial endotoxin testing (BET). This whitepaper reviews the advantages of Recombinant horseshoe crab Factor C (rFC) over the BET methods currently in widespread use. We compare the performance of LAL reagents with rFC, and summarize the evidence supporting our 10 reasons to choose rFC.

WHITE PAPER

The Hunt for the Missing Endotoxin

This white paper reviews the causes contributing to low endotoxin recovery (LER), the impact it creates, as well as solutions which can rectify the issues it results in. We also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of developing your de-masking protocols in-house, and how you can use the ENDO-RS® de-masking tool kit to make the process easier from beginning to end. Following this, we outline the pros and cons of outsourcing your de-masking project, what you should look for in a third-party company, and why you can and should trust bioMérieux with your de-masking protocol development.