Biologics technology transfer (tech transfer) requires close coordination across every step, from initial process definition, subsequent analytical interpretation, and cross-facility execution. Because equipment geometry, material attributes, and scale-dependent transport phenomena all influence each process, any small deviations introduced during these interactions can alter the performance and affect critical quality attributes. Successful tech transfer, therefore, serves to control and align operations rather than being limited to documentation alone.
While traditional transfer models rely on sequential handoffs between development and manufacturing teams, as well as analytical and quality functions, integrated operating models align these activities within a unified execution framework. Rather than advancing independently and resolving issues only at the conclusion of each step, which can create delays caused by deviations, each stage progresses concurrently.
Physical proximity for organizational integration
Integrated operating models align development and manufacturing activities within a shared environment. The resulting physical proximity supports operators to directly observe large-scale behaviors while immediately verifying small-scale effects.
Biomanufacturing processes require this immediacy. Upstream performance depends on the cell line, gas transfer efficiency, oxygen mass transfer coefficient, mixing time, nutrient consumption, and metabolite accumulation. Downstream recovery depends on the feed quality, impurity loading, column packing, residence time, as well as resin and membrane performance. These parameters interact dynamically and change with scale. When technical teams operate in isolation, evaluations occur retrospectively, and findings are often made after corrective options have narrowed. An integrated execution enables investigations while conditions remain unchanged, which reduces error propagation across subsequent runs.
Integrated operations also enable the concurrent execution of tech transfer activities. Facility fit assessments and raw material qualifications proceed alongside scale-up efforts. Validation for mixing studies, filtration capacity, resin and membrane lifetimes, and chemical hold times advances while engineering runs continue. Project timelines align on the observed performance rather than predefined stage gates. This concurrency shortens the overall transfer duration without compromising technical oversight.
Transcending the limits of sequential transfer
Effective tech transfer depends on preserving the scientific rationale behind process definition. Development scientists establish operating ranges based on interaction effects and the observed failure modes. When the process context is transferred only through documentation, gaps in interpretation emerge. Manufacturing teams may receive numerical parameters without full visibility into the technical assumptions underlying those values.
Integrated operating models preserve knowledge continuity by maintaining the active involvement of development and manufacturing science teams throughout execution. The individuals who define process controls remain engaged during scale-up, engineering runs, and qualification activities. Manufacturing decisions reflect the experimental rationale rather than inferred interpretation. Process science and analytical teams contribute continuous characterization data to confirm the alignment between scale-dependent behaviors and development expectations.
By improving reproducibility through continuous technical involvement, teams can distinguish scale-dependent effects from the engineering, material variability, and analytical artifacts introduced during execution. Decisions are based on a shared technical understanding rather than escalation through formal review. This approach reduces rework and limits unnecessary process modifications.
Accelerated development programs expose the limitations of sequential transfer models. When timelines compress and datasets remain incomplete, sequential execution introduces bottlenecks. Integrated operating models allow development refinement, scale-up, and manufacturing preparations to proceed simultaneously.
Process development teams perform small-scale experiments while manufacturing science teams evaluate large-scale execution. Analytical laboratories adapt and qualify methods in parallel. Manufacturing operations prepare the equipment, materials, and documentation with direct access to evolving process knowledge. GMP readiness thus aligns with technical maturity rather than following it. An integrated tech transfer model — by employing cross-functional expertise from development, manufacturing, MSAT, digitalization, engineering, and quality — evolves beyond retrospectively documenting what happened to proactively predicting what will happen.
Defining disciplined governance and technical engagement
An integrated execution model requires disciplined governance. Joint project structures define the ownership of technical decisions and document changes through a structured quality matrix and explicit risk classification system. Concurrency improves predictability under time constraints by resolving technical uncertainty early rather than deferring the resolution to late-stage qualifications.
Tech transfer assigns shared responsibility to the sending organization and the receiving manufacturer. The sending organization retains ownership of product-specific knowledge, while the receiving site controls the execution within its facilities and quality systems. Effective tech transfer requires continuous technical engagement rather than periodic information exchange.
Early technical engagement begins during the feasibility assessment. Complete process descriptions inform equipment compatibility and facility fit evaluations. Raw material specifications are aligned before procurement. Differences in bills of materials and process assumptions are identified early. Capital modifications proceed based on verified technical needs, determined via failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA), rather than assumptions.
During execution, continuous engagement enables timely decision-making. When technical risks emerge, both parties evaluate mitigation strategies using the same data. The responsibility for corrective actions remains clear. Decisions occur during execution rather than after a deviation, reducing the delay introduced by incomplete information.
Strategic and systematic risk mitigation
Risk management in biologics tech transfer progresses from laboratory evaluation to commercial execution. Early-stage experiments assess process robustness under controlled variations and inform the control strategy design. Engineering runs evaluate scale-dependent behaviors under representative conditions, while process performance qualifications confirm reproducibility during routine operations.
Scale introduces distinct risks. Mixing efficiency changes with the vessel geometry and impeller configuration. Gas transfer responds to the sparger design and agitation speed. Heat removal behaves differently across volumes. Downstream recovery depends on the column diameter, flow distribution, as well as resin and membrane performance. Integrated functions across teams address these risks through targeted verification rather than broad requalification.
During verification, teams execute client processes at small scales to confirm that mitigation strategies control the identified risks. Analytical monitoring provides empirical confirmation that quality attributes remain within defined limits. This approach addresses deviation risks before at-scale GMP manufacturing.
Analytical readiness directly affects batch disposition and release timelines. Delays in analytical transfer often define the critical path during qualification; therefore, integrated operating models treat analytical and process transfer as interdependent activities.
Teams assess analytical risks early. Equipment configuration differences, reagent sourcing, method sensitivity, and operator variability are evaluated before validation begins. Co-validation allows receiving laboratories to implement these methods while initial validation remains active at the sending site. Verification samples generated during engineering runs provide an additional readiness check before GMP manufacturing.
Going beyond the layers
Integrated operating models embed technical oversight into daily execution rather than layering it onto each activity. Physical and functional co-location enables direct exchange of technical insights, while continuous client engagement aligns ownership and decision-making. Structured risk management improves the control of scale-dependent behaviors. Integrated analytical transfer ensures that readiness aligns with manufacturing.
As biologics modalities diversify and processes grow complex, the success of tech transfer depends on integrated execution rather than each procedural completion. Integrated models convert tech transfer from a staged activity into controlled, data-driven operations.
Photo: da-kuk, Getty Images
Lalit Saxena is a bioprocess engineer with more than 21 years of experience in the biologics process development, tech transfer, and GMP manufacturing (clinical/ commercial) of drug substance spanning monoclonal antibodies and complex biologics. He currently serves as a senior director of MSAT for technology transfer in clinical and commercial manufacturing at Samsung Biologics. He leads a team of bioprocess scientists dedicated to advancing DS manufacturing control strategies aligned with evolving biotherapeutics technologies. He plays an instrumental role in accelerating technology transfer, PPQ, and commercialization through the standardized implementation of process analytical tools as well as by applying statistical and modeling approaches to drive efficient innovation. He also serves as a member of the Parenteral Drug Association Biopharmaceutical Advisory Board (BioAB) and an author for multiple peer-reviewed publications.
Jihyun Lee serves as a director of MSAT, where she is responsible for drug substance scale-up/down technology transfer. With over 14 years of specialized experience, she provides strategic technical insights to ensure the seamless integration of tech transfer models and alignment of cross-functional activities. Her expertise encompasses process development, scalability, and risk-based facility fit assessments. Notably, she has demonstrated hands-on leadership in establishing integrated, standardized tech transfer platforms that optimize for manufacturing excellence.
Gwangsik Kim serves as an associate director of MSAT for upstream tech transfer at Samsung Biologics with 9+ years of expertise in cell culture. He hold a bachelor’s degree in food bioscience and technology from Korea University.
As a senior scientist at Samsung Biologics responsible for upstream process transfer, Soomin Yim has been involved in more than 10 projects as both a subject matter expert and main project lead for over 8 years. With expertise in biotechnology, she advances successful tech transfer through comprehensive risk assessments and clear communication. She holds a bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology.
This post appears through the MedCity Influencers program. Anyone can publish their perspective on business and innovation in healthcare on MedCity News through MedCity Influencers. Click here to find out how.
