Batch Certification for Cell Therapies in the EU: A Guide to ATMP Compliance, Quality Control, and QP Release

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive guide to the batch certification process for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) in the European Union. Tailored for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, it covers the foundational EU regulatory framework, detailed methodological requirements for quality control, strategies to overcome common certification challenges, and the critical role of analytical validation. The content synthesizes current regulations, including the role of the Qualified Person (QP), and offers practical insights for navigating the complexities of bringing cell therapies to market.

Understanding the EU Regulatory Framework for ATMP Batch Release

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) represent a groundbreaking category of medicines for human use that are based on genes, cells, or tissues. In the European Union (EU), these innovative products are defined and regulated under Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 [1] [2]. The development and certification of these therapies, particularly within EU research frameworks, demand specialized regulatory knowledge and stringent quality control processes, especially during batch certification for cell-based products. ATMPs can be classified into three primary categories, with a fourth distinct category for combined products [1]. The regulatory landscape is evolving, with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) proposing revisions to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) guidelines specific to ATMPs in 2025 to align with new technological advancements and regulatory standards [3].

Table 1: Core Categories of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs)

ATMP Category	Definition	Key Manipulation	Primary Therapeutic Action
Gene Therapy Medicines (GTMP)	Contain genes that lead to a therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic effect [1].	Insertion of recombinant DNA created in the laboratory [1].	Treatment of genetic disorders, cancer, or long-term diseases [1].
Somatic-Cell Therapy Medicines (sCTMP)	Contain cells or tissues that have been manipulated to change their biological characteristics [1].	Substantial manipulation of cells to alter their biological properties or physiological functions [1] [2].	Cure, diagnose, or prevent diseases [1].
Tissue-Engineered Medicines (TEP)	Contain cells or tissues that have been modified to repair, regenerate, or replace human tissue [1].	Modification of cells or tissues to enable their application for repair, regeneration, or replacement [1].	Repair, regeneration, or replacement of human tissue [1].
Combined ATMPs	Contain one or more medical devices as an integral part of the medicine [1].	Integration of cells or tissues with a medical device, such as a biodegradable matrix or scaffold [1].	Varies based on the combined product's intended function.

The Batch Certification Process for ATMPs in the EU

The batch certification process for cell therapy products in the EU is a critical component of ensuring patient safety and product quality. All ATMPs must be authorized centrally via the EMA, which involves a single evaluation and authorisation procedure [1]. The Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) plays a central role in the scientific assessment of ATMPs, preparing a draft opinion on the quality, safety, and efficacy of the product before the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) adopts an opinion for the European Commission's final decision [1].

A cornerstone of batch release is compliance with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP). The Qualified Person (QP) at the Manufacturing Importation Authorization (MIA) holder is legally responsible for certifying that each batch has been produced and controlled in accordance with its marketing authorization and GMP regulations [4]. This requires a robust pharmaceutical quality system and direct written contracts defining responsibilities between the Marketing Authorization Holder (MAH), the MIA holder responsible for QP certification, and any contract manufacturers involved in the various stages of manufacture, importation, testing, and storage [4]. The integrity of this supply chain must be established and documented, with periodic verification of the supply chain for each batch of active substance [4]. The Product Quality Review (PQR), which must be conducted annually, is a key tool in this process, trending data from multiple batches to ensure consistency and control [4].

Experimental Protocols for ATMP Development and Quality Control

Protocol: Quality Control and Sterility Testing for a Cell-Based ATMP

Objective: To ensure the identity, purity, potency, and safety of a final cell therapy product batch prior to QP certification and release.

Materials:

• Final Product Container: The bag or vial containing the finished cell therapy product.
• Sterile Sampling Device: For aseptic removal of samples.
• Cell Counter and Viability Analyzer: (e.g., automated cell counter with trypan blue or flow cytometer with viability dyes).
• Flow Cytometer: For immunophenotyping and purity analysis.
• Microbiological Culture Media: For sterility testing (e.g., BacT/ALERT bottles).
• Endotoxin Testing Kit: (e.g., Limulus Amebocyte Lysate (LAL) assay).
• Molecular Biology Reagents: For detection of specific pathogens (PCR-based assays).
• Potency Assay Reagents: Specific to the product's mechanism of action (e.g., cytokine ELISA kits, cytotoxicity target cells).

Methodology:

• Sample Withdrawal: Aseptically withdraw representative samples from the final product container using a closed-system sampling device.
• Cell Count and Viability:
  • Mix the sample gently but thoroughly.
  • Dilute an aliquot appropriately and mix with a viability stain (e.g., trypan blue).
  • Analyze using an automated cell counter or manual hemocytometer. Calculate total nucleated cell count, viable cell count, and percentage viability. The batch must meet pre-defined specifications for viability (e.g., >70%).
• Identity and Purity (Flow Cytometry):
  • Stain an aliquot of cells with fluorescently-labeled antibodies targeting specific surface markers that define the product (identity) and contaminants (purity).
  • Acquire data on a flow cytometer and analyze using appropriate software.
  • The percentage of cells expressing identity markers must meet the release specification (e.g., >90%). The percentage of contaminating cell populations must be below the specified limit.
• Potency Assay:
  • Perform a functional assay relevant to the biological activity of the product. For a T-cell therapy, this could be a cytokine release assay upon antigen stimulation or a direct cytotoxicity assay against target cells.
  • Incubate cells under defined conditions and measure the output (e.g., IFN-γ concentration via ELISA, specific lysis of target cells).
  • The result must fall within the validated range of the assay to demonstrate product potency.
• Safety Testing:
  • Sterility Test: Inoculate samples into aerobic and anaerobic culture media and incubate for 14 days. The test must show no growth of microorganisms.
  • Endotoxin Test: Perform the LAL assay according to the manufacturer's instructions. The endotoxin level must be below the specified threshold (e.g., <5 EU/kg/hr).
  • Mycoplasma Testing: Use a validated PCR-based or culture-based method. The result must be negative.

Data Analysis: All data is compiled in a Batch Manufacturing and Testing Record. The QP reviews all data, including in-process controls and deviations, against the Marketing Authorization specifications before certifying the batch for release.

Protocol: Process Validation for a Tissue-Engineered Product

Objective: To demonstrate and document that the manufacturing process for a tissue-engineered product consistently produces a product meeting its pre-determined quality attributes.

Materials: (In addition to standard manufacturing equipment and reagents)

• Multiple, Independent Donor Materials: To assess process robustness across biological variability.
• Validated Analytical Methods: All QC methods used for release must be validated.
• Scale-Down Models: Of the manufacturing process that are representative of the full-scale process.

Methodology:

• Prospective Validation Design: Perform a minimum of three consecutive validation runs at the commercial scale, using defined acceptance criteria for critical process parameters (CPPs) and critical quality attributes (CQAs).
• Execution: Execute the manufacturing runs as per standard operating procedures, monitoring and recording all CPPs (e.g., enzyme digestion time, culture medium replenishment rates, cell seeding density).
• Testing: Subject the final product from each run to the full battery of release tests (identity, purity, potency, safety).
• Data Collection and Analysis: Statistically analyze all data to prove the process operates consistently and produces a product that reliably meets all quality specifications.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Key Reagents and Materials for ATMP Development and QC

Reagent/Material	Function in ATMP Development/Manufacturing
Cell Culture Media & Supplements	Provides nutrients and growth factors for the ex vivo expansion and maintenance of cells. Formulations are often serum-free and xeno-free for regulatory compliance.
Recombinant Growth Factors/Cytokines	Directs cell differentiation, expansion, or activation towards the desired therapeutic phenotype (e.g., IL-2 for T-cell growth).
Flow Cytometry Antibodies	Used for quality control to confirm cell identity (CD markers), purity, and potency (functional markers). Critical for lot release.
Vector Systems (Viral/Non-Viral)	For gene therapy medicines (GTMPs), these are used as vehicles to deliver therapeutic genes into target cells (e.g., lentivirus, AAV).
Biodegradable Matrices/Scaffolds	Essential for tissue-engineered medicines (TEPs) and combined ATMPs. Provides a 3D structure for cell attachment, growth, and tissue formation.
Cell Separation Kits (e.g., MACS)	For the isolation and purification of specific cell populations from a starting material (e.g., CD34+ cells, specific T-cell subsets) to ensure product purity.

The Central Role of the Qualified Person (QP) in Batch Certification

Within the European Union's pharmaceutical regulatory framework, the Qualified Person (QP) holds a central and legally mandated role in safeguarding public health by ensuring that every batch of a medicinal product meets rigorous standards of quality, safety, and efficacy before it is released to the market or used in clinical trials [5] [6]. This function is particularly critical for cell therapy products, which are often characterized by their complexity, limited shelf life, and unique manufacturing challenges. The QP does not merely oversee a final check but is personally legally responsible for the certification of each batch, a duty that carries significant legal weight and cannot be overruled by commercial or management pressures [5]. For developers and researchers of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), such as cell therapies, a deep understanding of the QP's role, responsibilities, and the detailed certification process is indispensable for successfully navigating the path from research to clinical application and, ultimately, to market approval.

The Legal and Regulatory Framework

The role and responsibilities of the QP are enshrined in EU legislation [6] [7]. The foundational requirements for manufacturing and batch certification are detailed in EudraLex Volume 4, which covers Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) guidelines [8]. This volume consists of multiple parts and annexes that provide specific guidance, with Annex 16 being directly dedicated to "Certification by a Qualified Person and Batch Release" [8].

Key Legal Acts and Guidelines

• Commission Directive 2003/94/EC: Lays down the principles and guidelines of GMP for medicinal products for human use [8].
• Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1569: Specifies principles and guidelines for GMP for investigational medicinal products for human use, supplementing the Clinical Trial Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 [8].
• Annex 13 of EudraLex Volume 4: Provides detailed GMP guidelines for investigational medicinal products (IMPs), which are directly relevant to clinical trials for cell therapies [8].
• GMP for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products: The European Commission has published a specific set of GMP guidelines tailored to ATMPs, which adapt the general EU GMP requirements to the particular characteristics of these innovative products [9].

For cell therapy products, which are classified as ATMPs, developers must also be aware of additional legislative requirements concerning the use of substances of human origin, such as tissues and cells. Compliance with directives on their procurement, donation, and testing is mandatory [9].

Personal Legal Liability of the QP

A defining characteristic of the QP role in the EU is the concept of personal legal liability. Unlike in some other regions where quality representatives act on behalf of their company, the QP is personally accountable for their certification decisions [5]. If a QP knowingly releases a defective batch that causes patient harm, they can be held personally liable. This legal responsibility underscores the critical nature of the QP's function and the necessity for their complete independence; their decisions regarding batch certification cannot be overruled by management [5].

Table: Key Regulatory Documents for QP Certification of Cell Therapies

Document Category	Specific Guideline / Annex	Relevance to Cell Therapy
General GMP	EudraLex Vol. 4, Part I (Chapters 1-9)	Foundational requirements for personnel, premises, documentation, and production [8].
IMP & Batch Release	Annex 13 (IMP), Annex 16 (Batch Release)	Specific rules for clinical trial materials and the formal batch release process [8].
ATMP-Specific GMP	GMP for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products	Adapts GMP principles to the specific nature of ATMPs, including complex manufacturing [9].
Sterile Products	Annex 1 (Manufacture of Sterile Medicinal Products)	Critical for many cell therapies that are administered parenterally [8].
Biological Products	Annex 2 (Manufacture of Biological Substances)	Provides guidance relevant to the biological nature of cell therapies [8].

The QP Certification Process: A Detailed Protocol

The QP certification of a batch is a meticulous, documentation-intensive process that requires verification of every stage of the product's lifecycle. The following protocol outlines the key stages and documentation requirements, with specific considerations for cell therapy products.

Pre-certification Requirements

Before a QP can certify a batch, several foundational elements must be established and verified:

• QP Eligibility and Training: The QP must possess the required academic qualifications and practical experience as defined in EU directives. They must also engage in continuous training to stay current with evolving technologies and regulatory updates, often involving internal training and on-site audits [5].
• GMP Compliance of Manufacturing Sites: All sites involved in the manufacture of the active substance and the finished product must be compliant with EU GMP standards. For sites outside the EU, this requires a QP declaration attesting to equivalent GMP standards, which is often supported by audit reports [5].
• Quality Agreements: Clear, legally binding quality agreements must be in place defining the responsibilities of all parties involved in the manufacturing and supply chain, which is especially complex for cell therapies that may involve multiple facilities [5].

Documentation Review and Verification Protocol

The core of the QP's activity is the systematic review of batch-related documentation, which can be categorized into three main areas [5]:

Area 1: Regulatory Documentation

• Objective: To verify the batch is manufactured and controlled in compliance with authorized parameters.
• Methodology: The QP must cross-reference the batch against the following approved documents:
  • Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD) or Marketing Authorisation (MA).
  • Approved clinical trial protocol (for IMPs).
  • Relevant regulatory approvals from competent authorities.
• Deliverable: Confirmation of regulatory alignment.

Area 2: Supply Chain and Quality System Documentation

• Objective: To ensure the integrity of the manufacturing and supply chain.
• Methodology: Review documents that provide an audit trail of quality and compliance:
  • QP declaration for imported starting materials or products.
  • Quality agreements between all contractors.
  • Audit reports of manufacturers and key suppliers.
  • Records of shipment and storage conditions.
• Deliverable: Assurance of GMP compliance throughout the supply chain.

Area 3: Batch-Specific Manufacturing and Control Records

• Objective: To confirm the specific batch was manufactured and controlled correctly.
• Methodology: Meticulous line-by-line review of:
  • Complete batch manufacturing and packaging records.
  • Records of in-process controls and their results.
  • Analytical test results and the Certificate of Analysis for the finished product.
  • Review of deviations, non-conformances, and any related investigations and corrective actions.
  • Stability data supporting the shelf-life under proposed storage conditions.
• Deliverable: Confirmation that the batch meets its quality specifications.

For cell therapy products, this review includes additional critical parameters such as potency testing, viability, identity, purity (e.g., freedom from microbial contamination), and characterization of the cellular population [10].

Diagram 1: QP Batch Certification Workflow. This flowchart outlines the key decision points in the batch certification process, from initial documentation review to final release or rejection.

Special Considerations for Cell Therapy IMPs

For cell therapies used in clinical trials, the certification process includes additional specific checks [5] [8]:

• Blinding Checks: Verification that the blinding code has been correctly applied, if the trial is blinded.
• Label Text Verification: Ensuring the label text complies with the approved protocol and is in the required languages, accurately reflecting the unique characteristics of the cell therapy (e.g., "for autologous use only").
• Chain of Identity/Chain of Custody: Confirming robust systems are in place to ensure the correct patient's cells are processed and returned without mix-up, a critical aspect for autologous therapies.

Analytical Toolkit for Cell Therapy Batch Certification

The quality control of cell therapy products relies on a suite of sophisticated analytical methods to confirm their safety, potency, and identity. The QP must verify that these tests have been performed satisfactorily according to validated methods.

Table: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Therapy Characterization

Research Reagent / Material	Critical Function in Quality Control
Cell Staining Antibodies & Flow Cytometry Reagents	Characterization of cell surface and intracellular markers to confirm product identity and purity (e.g., CD marker expression).
Cell Culture Media & Supplements	Used in viability and potency assays; also critical for in-process testing during manufacture.
Microbial Detection Kits (e.g., Mycoplasma, Sterility)	Essential for safety testing to detect bacterial, fungal, and mycoplasmal contamination.
Endotoxin Detection Assays	To quantify bacterial endotoxins, a critical safety release parameter for injectable therapies.
PCR Reagents & Standards	Used for detection of specific viral contaminants, vector copy number (for genetically modified cells), and residual DNA quantification.
Reference Standards & Controls	Qualified cell lines or controls essential for assay validation and ensuring the accuracy and reproducibility of potency and identity tests.

Detailed Experimental Protocol: Potency Assay for a Cell-Based Immunotherapy

Objective: To measure the biological activity of a T-cell immunotherapy product, providing evidence of its proposed mechanism of action, which is a critical quality attribute assessed during QP certification [10].

Methodology:

• Co-culture Setup:

  • Harvest and count target tumor cells (e.g., a specific leukemia cell line).
  • Harvest and count the effector T-cell therapy product (the batch being tested).
  • Seed target cells in a multi-well plate at a predefined density (e.g., 50,000 cells/well).
  • Add effector cells at multiple Effector:Target (E:T) ratios (e.g., 10:1, 5:1, 1:1) to the wells. Include replicates for each ratio.
  • Include control wells: target cells alone (to measure background cell death) and effector cells alone.

• Incubation and Activation:

  • Incubate the co-culture plates for a specified period (e.g., 16-24 hours) at 37°C, 5% CO₂.
  • This allows for T-cell recognition and activation against the target cells.

• Cytotoxicity Measurement:

  • Measure target cell lysis using a flow cytometry-based cytotoxicity detection assay.
  • Stain the cells with a fluorescent dye that binds to DNA (e.g., Propidium Iodide) to identify dead cells.
  • Acquire data on a flow cytometer, gating on the target cell population.
  • Calculate the specific lysis at each E:T ratio using the formula: ((% Lysis in Test - % Spontaneous Lysis in Target Control) / (100 - % Spontaneous Lysis in Target Control)) * 100.

• Data Analysis and Acceptance Criteria:

  • Generate a dose-response curve of specific lysis versus E:T ratio.
  • The batch is considered to have met the potency specification if the specific lysis at the 10:1 E:T ratio is ≥ 50%, a value established during product development and validation.

Significance for QP: The results of this assay, documented in a Certificate of Analysis, provide the QP with direct evidence that the batch possesses the required biological functional activity, a key aspect of the certification decision [10].

Navigating Post-Brexit and Complex Supply Chains

The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU has added complexity to the QP certification landscape. UK QP certifications are no longer automatically valid in the EU, and vice versa [5]. This means that for a batch to be marketed in both territories, it may require separate certifications by an EU-based QP and a UK-based QP.

For cell therapy products manufactured outside the EEA, the importation process is considered a final manufacturing step [6] [7]. Upon arrival in the EU/UK, these products must undergo rigorous quality control testing within the EEA/UK to verify compliance with regional standards. Only after this testing and a full documentation review can the QP certify the batch, allowing it to be transferred to saleable stock [6]. This layered scrutiny is essential for maintaining the highest quality standards for these sensitive products within the different markets.

The Qualified Person is the linchpin of patient safety and product quality in the EU's pharmaceutical regulatory system for cell therapy products. Their role extends far beyond a final check, encompassing a deep and continuous involvement with the entire manufacturing and control process, underpinned by personal legal accountability. For researchers and developers, integrating QP requirements early in the development process is not merely a regulatory hurdle but a critical component of robust product design. Building strong, collaborative partnerships with QPs and ensuring open communication and timely provision of comprehensive documentation are essential for the successful and timely certification of cell therapy batches, ultimately ensuring that these innovative treatments can reach patients safely and efficiently.

The development and manufacture of cell therapy products in the European Union operate within a sophisticated regulatory ecosystem designed to ensure patient safety while fostering innovation. The cornerstone of this framework is Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 on advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), which establishes specific requirements for cell therapies, gene therapies, and tissue-engineered products [11]. This regulation works in conjunction with several key directives that collectively create a comprehensive system for quality control, manufacturing oversight, and batch certification. For researchers and drug development professionals, understanding this intricate framework is essential for successfully navigating the pathway from laboratory discovery to clinically available treatments.

The European medicines regulatory system is structured around the centralized authorization procedure for ATMPs, which ensures that these innovative products benefit from a single evaluation and authorization process applicable across all EU member states [1]. This system is overseen by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and its Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT), which provides scientific expertise for evaluating ATMPs [1]. The regulatory framework emphasizes Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) compliance, qualified person (QP) certification, and specific batch release procedures that collectively ensure the quality, safety, and efficacy of cell therapy products throughout their lifecycle from research to post-authorization monitoring [12].

Core Legislative Instruments

Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 on Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products

Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 establishes the specific legal framework for ATMPs in the European Union, creating a dedicated pathway for these innovative therapies [13]. This regulation classifies ATMPs into four main categories: gene therapy medicinal products, somatic cell therapy medicinal products, tissue-engineered products, and combined ATMPs that incorporate one or more medical devices as integral components [1] [11]. The regulation mandates that all ATMPs must be authorized through the centralized procedure, ensuring consistent evaluation standards across all EU member states [1].

A fundamental requirement under this regulation is that ATMP manufacturers must adhere to specific GMP standards outlined in EudraLex Volume 4, which contains dedicated guidelines for ATMPs in Part IV [13]. The regulation also established the Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) within the EMA, which plays a central role in the scientific assessment of ATMPs, provides classifications and recommendations, and contributes to scientific advice for developers [1]. For cell therapy products, the regulation applies when cells have undergone "substantial manipulation" leading to changes in their biological characteristics, physiological functions, or structural properties relevant for the intended therapeutic application, distinguishing them from minimally manipulated cells used in transplants [14] [11].

Related Directives

Several directives work in conjunction with Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 to form a complete regulatory framework for cell therapy products:

• Directive 2001/83/EC: This foundational directive establishes the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, defining cell therapy products as medicinal products and setting requirements for marketing authorization [14]. It has been amended several times to address the specific characteristics of advanced therapies.

• Directive 2009/120/EC: This directive adapts the definitions and detailed scientific requirements for ATMPs, providing technical guidance on quality, non-clinical, and clinical aspects of ATMP development [11].

• Directive 2001/20/EC: This legislation establishes that clinical trials are mandatory for cell therapy products and describes specific requirements for trial approval, emphasizing the need for rigorous clinical evaluation [14].

• Directive 2004/23/EC: This directive sets standards for quality and safety regarding the donation, procurement, testing, processing, preservation, storage, and distribution of human tissues and cells, forming the foundation for starting material controls [14].

Table 1: Core EU Legislative Instruments Governing Cell Therapy Products

Legislative Instrument	Type	Key Focus Areas	Relevance to Batch Certification
Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007	Regulation	ATMP classification, centralized authorization, specific requirements	Establishes foundation for ATMP-specific quality requirements
Directive 2001/83/EC	Directive	Community code for medicinal products, marketing authorization	Defines legal basis for medicinal product regulation
Directive 2009/120/EC	Directive	Technical requirements for ATMP quality, safety, and efficacy	Provides detailed scientific guidance for ATMP development
Directive 2001/20/EC	Directive	Clinical trial requirements for investigational medicinal products	Governs clinical trial applications and oversight
Directive 2004/23/EC	Directive	Quality and safety standards for human tissues and cells	Regulates sourcing and handling of starting materials

Batch Certification Process for Cell Therapy Products

The Role of the Qualified Person in Batch Certification

The Qualified Person (QP) plays a pivotal role in the batch certification process for cell therapy products in the EU, serving as the final gatekeeper before product release [15]. According to EU GMP Annex 16, the QP bears ultimate responsibility for certifying that each batch of ATMPs meets all quality requirements and has been manufactured in compliance with the marketing authorization and GMP standards [15] [13]. This certification requires the QP to personally review all manufacturing and testing documentation, ensuring that appropriate quality controls have been applied throughout the production process.

For cell therapy products, the QP must verify several critical aspects before batch certification, including compliance with marketing authorization, adherence to Good Manufacturing Practice, successful completion of required testing, and proper documentation of manufacturing processes [15]. In decentralized manufacturing models particularly relevant to autologous cell therapies, the QP at a central facility may rely on data from decentralized manufacturing sites, but retains responsibility for ensuring that personnel at these sites are adequately qualified and trained, and that standardized procedures are followed across all locations [13].

Official Control Authority Batch Release

For certain biological medicinal products, including some cell therapies, an additional Official Control Authority Batch Release (OCABR) procedure may be required as stipulated in Article 114 of Directive 2001/83/EC [16]. This regulatory requirement involves testing by an Official Medicines Control Laboratory (OMCL) within the EU/EEA network before the product can be placed on the market. The OCABR process provides an independent quality verification by competent authorities, supplementing the manufacturer's quality controls and QP certification.

The OCABR procedure requires marketing authorization holders to submit samples and production documentation to an OMCL, which performs examinations and tests in accordance with specific product guidelines [16]. If the results are satisfactory, the competent authority issues an Official Control Authority Batch Release Certificate, which is mutually recognized by all EU member states. This certificate confirms that the batch complies with approved specifications in the relevant European Pharmacopoeia monographs and marketing authorization [16]. For cell therapy developers, early engagement with OMCLs—recommended at least one year before marketing authorization application submission—is crucial for facilitating this process and ensuring supply chain continuity [16].

Experimental Protocols for Batch Testing

Protocol 1: Sterility Testing for Cell Therapy Products

Principle: This protocol describes the methodology for conducting sterility testing on cell therapy products to detect bacterial and fungal contamination, ensuring patient safety and compliance with European Pharmacopoeia requirements.

Materials and Reagents:

• Culture Media: Fluid thioglycollate medium (FTM) for anaerobic and aerobic bacteria, soybean-casein digest medium (SCDM) for fungi
• Positive Control Organisms: Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Bacteroides vulgatus, Clostridium sporogenes, Candida albicans, Aspergillus brasiliensis
• Sample Dilution: Phosphate buffered saline (PBS) with 0.1% polysorbate 20
• Membrane Filtration System: 0.45µm pore size cellulose nitrate membranes

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Aseptically remove approximately 1-2 mL of cell therapy product under laminar airflow conditions. For products with cell concentrations >10^6 cells/mL, dilute 1:10 with PBS containing 0.1% polysorbate 20 to reduce antimicrobial activity.
• Membrane Filtration: Transfer the entire sample volume to the membrane filtration system. Filter under vacuum pressure not exceeding 300 mmHg.
• Membrane Transfer: Aseptically transfer the membrane to FTM medium. Repeat with a second membrane for SCDM medium.
• Incubation: Incubate FTM at 30-35°C for 14 days and SCDM at 20-25°C for 14 days.
• Observation and Interpretation: Examine media daily for visual evidence of microbial growth. Compare with positive controls inoculated with <100 CFU of appropriate test organisms. The test is valid if positive controls show growth within 7 days. The sample passes if no microbial growth is observed in test media.

Validation Parameters:

• Bacteriostasis and Fungistasis Test: Demonstrate media ability to support growth of low-inoculum organisms in presence of product
• Sample Compatibility: Verify filtration method does not damage cells or interfere with microbial recovery
• Limit of Detection: Validate detection of ≤10 CFU for each test organism

Protocol 2: Potency Assay for Chondrocyte-Based Therapy

Principle: This protocol measures the functional capacity of chondrocyte-based cell therapy products to produce cartilage-specific extracellular matrix components, serving as a potency assay for batch release.

Materials and Reagents:

• 3D Culture System: Agaroseose Type VII or collagen type I matrix
• Chondrogenic Media: DMEM high glucose, ITS+ Premix (Insulin-Transferrin-Selenium), 100nM dexamethasone, 50µg/mL ascorbate-2-phosphate, 40µg/mL L-proline, 100µg/mL sodium pyruvate, 10ng/mL TGF-β3
• Analysis Reagents: Dimethylmethylene blue (DMB) dye, papain digestion solution, alcian blue, anti-collagen type II antibody, safranin O
• Standards: Chondroitin sulfate (0-50µg/mL), purified collagen type II (0-20µg/mL)

Procedure:

• Cell Seeding in 3D Culture: Resuspend chondrocytes at 10×10^6 cells/mL in appropriate matrix material. Plate 200µL aliquots in 48-well plates. Allow matrix polymerization at 37°C for 2 hours.
• Chondrogenic Differentiation: Add 1mL chondrogenic media to each well. Culture for 21 days with media changes every 2-3 days. Maintain control wells with basal media without TGF-β3.
• Matrix Production Analysis:
  • Glycosaminoglycan (GAG) Quantification: Digest constructs with papain (65°C, 18 hours). Mix digest with DMB dye and measure absorbance at 525nm. Compare to chondroitin sulfate standard curve.
  • Collagen Type II Immunoassay: Fix constructs in 4% paraformaldehyde. Section at 10µm thickness. Perform immunohistochemistry with anti-collagen type II antibody and quantify staining intensity.
• Calculation of Potency:
  • Normalize GAG and collagen type II content to DNA content
  • Calculate potency relative to reference standard with assigned potency of 1.0
  • Express as percentage of reference standard activity

Acceptance Criteria:

• Test valid if positive control (reference standard) shows GAG content ≥15µg/10^6 cells and strong collagen type II immunostaining
• Batch passes if demonstrates ≥70% potency relative to reference standard

Visualization of Regulatory Pathways

Batch Certification Workflow for Cell Therapies

ATMP Classification Decision Tree

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents for Cell Therapy Batch Testing

Reagent/Material	Function	Application in Batch Testing	Quality Standards
Cell Culture Media	Supports cell growth and maintenance	Manufacturing process, viability testing	GMP-grade, endotoxin tested, composition documented
Flow Cytometry Antibodies	Cell surface and intracellular marker detection	Identity testing, purity assessment, characterization	Validated specificity, appropriate fluorochrome conjugates
Viral Vector Systems	Genetic modification of cells	Gene therapy products, genetically modified cell therapies	GMP-grade, titer standardized, replication-competent virus testing
LAL Reagent	Endotoxin detection	Safety testing for pyrogens	USP/EP compliant, standardized sensitivity
PCR Reagents	Nucleic acid amplification	Mycoplasma testing, vector copy number analysis, identity testing	GMP-grade, validated primers/probes, low DNase/RNase activity
Matrix Scaffolds	3D support structure for tissue engineering	Potency assays, functional testing	Sterile, biocompatibility tested, consistent lot-to-lot
Cryopreservation Media	Long-term cell storage	Final product formulation, stability testing	Defined composition, DMSO quality controlled, GMP-grade
Enzyme Assay Kits	Metabolic activity measurement	Viability testing, potency assays	Validated for cell therapy products, standardized controls

The EU regulatory framework for cell therapy batch certification represents a sophisticated system balancing rigorous safety standards with support for innovative therapeutic development. Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007, complemented by key directives, establishes clear pathways for ATMP authorization with specific GMP requirements detailed in EudraLex Volume 4, Part IV [13]. The batch certification process hinges on the pivotal role of the Qualified Person, who ensures compliance with marketing authorization and GMP standards before product release [15]. For certain biological therapies, the Official Control Authority Batch Release provides an additional layer of regulatory oversight through independent testing by designated laboratories [16].

For researchers and drug development professionals, successful navigation of this framework requires early regulatory planning and robust quality systems capable of addressing the unique challenges of cell therapy products. The decentralized manufacturing models emerging for autologous therapies present particular challenges for batch certification, requiring careful attention to standardization across multiple sites while maintaining the centralized oversight responsibility of the Qualified Person [13]. As the field of advanced therapies continues to evolve, maintaining awareness of regulatory updates and engaging early with competent authorities through scientific advice procedures remains essential for efficient translation of cell therapy research into approved medicinal products.

For developers of cell therapy products in the European Union, the batch release process represents a critical juncture where rigorous quality assurance meets complex logistical realities. Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), which include cell and gene therapies, are among the most complex medicines developed, presenting unique supply chain challenges that are often underestimated or misunderstood [17]. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) establishes that batches of ATMPs must only be released for sale, supply, or clinical use after certification by a Qualified Person (QP) who ensures compliance with EU Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) [9] [18]. This requirement applies even to therapies imported into or exported from the European Union, creating a landscape where quarantine control and logistical planning become paramount for successful product delivery.

The core challenge lies in balancing regulatory compliance with the practical constraints of living cell products. Unlike conventional pharmaceuticals, cell therapies often have limited stability windows, require precise temperature control, and may involve patient-specific manufacturing. The "quarantine" status—where products must remain at the manufacturing site or be shipped under quarantine to another authorized site until QP release—creates significant logistical constraints that can tighten timelines and challenge sponsors to provide controlled storage of products awaiting release [18]. Understanding and navigating this complex interplay between regulatory requirements and logistical realities is essential for successful batch release of cell therapies in the EU.

Regulatory Framework and QP Responsibilities

The Legal Basis for Batch Release

The foundation of batch release requirements in the EU stems from Directive 2001/83/EC, which states that each production batch must undergo "a full qualitative analysis, a quantitative analysis of at least all the active substances and all the other tests or checks necessary to ensure the quality of the medicinal products in accordance with the requirements of the marketing authorisation" [19]. This requirement applies particularly to medicinal products coming from third countries, mandating that this testing occur within a Member State. The Qualified Person bears ultimate responsibility for certifying that each batch complies with this requirement and meets all provisions of the marketing authorization before release for distribution or sale [7] [20].

The regulatory framework for ATMPs incorporates additional layers of complexity. Developers must comply with legislation governing all stages of medicine development, including Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), Good Clinical Practice (GCP), and Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) requirements [9]. The European Commission has published specific GMP guidelines for ATMPs that adapt EU GMP requirements to the specific characteristics of these products, addressing novel and complex manufacturing scenarios [9]. Furthermore, utilizing substances of human origin such as blood, tissues, and cells requires compliance with additional legislation (Directives 2002/98/EC and 2004/23/EC and their associated implementing directives) regarding procurement, donation, and testing [9].

The Role of the Qualified Person

The Qualified Person plays a pivotal role in the batch release process, with responsibilities enshrined in EU law [7]. QPs are highly qualified individuals with extensive GMP experience, typically holding advanced degrees in pharmacy, biology, or chemistry [7]. Their primary function is to ensure that each batch of medicinal products has been manufactured and tested in compliance with GMP standards and the requirements of the relevant Marketing Authorization (MA) or Clinical Trial Authorization (CTA) [7].

The QP must maintain independence in release decisions—management may not overrule a QP's decision to reject batches [20]. The QP is authorized by local health authorities based on specific education (sciences, pharmacy) and experience with particular products and processes [20]. This specialization is crucial; experience with one product type (e.g., radiopharmaceuticals) does not necessarily qualify a QP to release cell therapy products [20].

For cell therapies specifically, the QP must ascertain the GMP status of each manufacturer in the supply chain, which is typically done through on-site audits [20]. The QP must also ensure that appropriate contracts are in place between the Marketing Authorization Holder (MAH) and the Manufacturing Import Authorization (MIA) holder responsible for QP certification, as well as between the MIA holder and sites involved in various stages of manufacture, importation, testing, and storage [4].

Table: Key Regulatory Directives Governing ATMP Batch Release in the EU

Directive/Regulation	Key Requirement	Application to ATMPs
Directive 2001/83/EC	Requires batch testing in EU member state for products from third countries	Applies to all ATMPs imported to EU
Directive 2003/94/EC	Lays down principles for GMP for medicinal products	Supplemented by specific ATMP GMP guidelines
Directives 2002/98/EC & 2004/23/EC	Govern quality standards for human tissues and cells	Applies to procurement of starting materials for most ATMPs
Regulation (EU) No 536/2014	Specific labeling requirements for investigational products	Applies to ATIMPs (Advanced Therapy Investigational Medicinal Products)

Quarantine Control Strategies

Defining the Quarantine Period

In the context of cell therapy batch release, "quarantine" refers to the status of products that have been manufactured but not yet certified by a Qualified Person for release. According to regulatory guidance, until a batch is released, "it should remain at the site of manufacture or be shipped under quarantine to another authorized site" [18]. This quarantine period encompasses the time from completion of manufacturing through all necessary quality control testing, documentation review, and final QP certification.

The quarantine period is particularly critical for cell therapies due to their limited stability windows. Unlike traditional pharmaceuticals with extended shelf lives, many cell therapy products have viability measured in hours or days, creating tremendous pressure to minimize quarantine duration. Furthermore, some ATMPs cannot be cryopreserved and require immediate release for infusion or implantation within very short timeframes—sometimes only a few hours [17]. These products necessitate a two-stage release process where in-process QC data are used for initial release, with final release occurring several weeks later when all sterility and other QC data are available [17].

Quarantine Management Protocols

Effective quarantine management requires robust procedures for physical or logical segregation of unreleased products. For physical quarantine, dedicated storage units with restricted access and clear status labeling are essential. Logical quarantine may involve inventory management systems that prevent shipment of unreleased products, coupled with physical storage in controlled environments appropriate to the product's stability requirements.

The following workflow diagram illustrates the key decision points in the quarantine and release process:

Figure 1: Quarantine Control and Batch Release Decision Workflow

For products with stability constraints, two-stage release protocols are implemented. This approach uses in-process QC data for initial release to the clinic, with final release contingent upon completion of all quality control tests, particularly those with extended timelines like sterility testing [17]. This process requires a comprehensive quality risk assessment and controlled procedures to ensure clinical end-users can be contacted immediately if adverse QC data emerge post-release [17].

Documentation control during quarantine is equally critical. Batch records, analytical test results, certificates of analysis, and environmental monitoring data must be compiled and reviewed systematically. The QP must have access to all manufacturing and testing records, including those from contracted facilities, to make the final release determination [7]. Electronic document management systems with controlled access and audit trails facilitate efficient document review while maintaining data integrity.

Logistical Constraints and Solutions

Supply Chain Configuration Options

The unique characteristics of cell therapies—particularly their limited stability and often patient-specific nature—create significant logistical challenges throughout the batch release process. Three primary supply chain models have emerged to address these constraints:

• Centralized Manufacturing: Donor materials are transported from multiple geographical sites to a global or regional manufacturing facility. This model offers maximum control and requires the least complexity but demands sufficient stability in the starting material for transport [17].
• Distributed Pre-processing with Central Manufacturing: Time-sensitive donor materials are sent to regional hubs for initial processing (e.g., cryopreservation of mononuclear cells) before shipment to a central manufacturing site. This approach can be cost-effective but requires technology transfer and validation at multiple sites [17].
• Regionally Distributed Manufacturing: Complete manufacturing processes are established in regional facilities, allowing direct shipment of time-sensitive donor materials to nearby manufacturers. While attractive, this model carries high risk and cost due to duplicative facilities and the need for multiple manufacturing licenses [17].

The following diagram illustrates the decision process for selecting the appropriate supply chain model:

Figure 2: Supply Chain Model Selection Based on Product Characteristics

Transport and Storage Logistics

Transport of cell therapies presents unique challenges, particularly for cryopreserved products. Most ATMPs are currently cryopreserved in vapor phase nitrogen (VPN) and shipped in dry shippers [17]. While effective for small-scale production, this approach becomes logistically challenging at commercial scale with thousands of doses annually [17]. All products should be transported under temperature control with continuous monitoring, and temperature logs must be available to both end users and manufacturers [17].

Recent regulatory developments may alleviate some logistical constraints. The UK's MHRA has introduced frameworks for Point of Care and Modular Manufacture, allowing medicines to be manufactured closer to patients [21]. Under this new legislation, hospitals, health clinics, and local care settings now have a pathway to conduct manufacturing steps for personalized or time-sensitive treatments on-site or nearby, potentially reducing transport delays [21]. While specific to the UK, this regulatory evolution may signal future directions for the broader EU market.

Table: Stability and Storage Requirements for Different Cell Therapy Types

Therapy Type	Typical Storage Temperature	Maximum Quarantine Period	Release Testing Timeline
Fresh Allogeneic Cell Therapies	2-8°C or Ambient	24-72 hours	3-7 days (with two-stage release)
Cryopreserved Autologous Products	≤-140°C (Vapor Phase Nitrogen)	Several weeks	2-4 weeks
Gene-Modified Cell Therapies	≤-140°C (Vapor Phase Nitrogen)	Several weeks	2-4 weeks
Tissue-Engineered Products	Product-Specific	Highly variable	1-8 weeks

Batch Testing and Methodologies

Regulatory Testing Requirements

EU regulations mandate that batch release testing be conducted in Europe for products marketed in the territory [19]. This requirement applies specifically to finished marketed products, with each batch requiring testing against the approved product specification within the EU, even when manufactured outside the region [19]. The testing must include "a full qualitative analysis, a quantitative analysis of at least all the active substances and all the other tests or checks necessary to ensure the quality of the medicinal products in accordance with the requirements of the marketing authorisation" [19].

For cell therapies, release testing typically includes sterility, mycoplasma, endotoxin, viability, potency, identity, and purity assays. The specific testing requirements depend on the product characteristics and are defined in the Marketing Authorization. Importantly, samples for batch release testing must be taken from the bulk shipment on European soil—sampling at the manufacturing site outside Europe and sending samples separately to the testing laboratory is not permitted [19].

Method Transfer and Validation

When outsourcing batch release testing to contract laboratories, method transfer becomes a critical process. The methods and specifications used by the contract laboratory must be exactly those detailed in the Marketing Authorization Application (MAA) [19]. The manufacturer must maintain control of these documents throughout the testing period, as any changes could require regulatory approval [19].

Method transfer for complex cell therapy assays can be time-consuming, particularly when establishing cell banks for in vitro potency testing or validating specialized equipment and software [19]. The transfer process must ensure sufficient staff are trained to perform all batch tests within required timeframes, with provisions for cascade training to accommodate staff turnover and increasing production volumes [19].

Table: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Therapy Batch Release

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function in Batch Release	Critical Quality Attributes
Cell Viability Assays	Flow cytometry reagents (7-AAD, Annexin V), automated cell counters	Determine percentage of viable cells in final product	Specificity, sensitivity, linearity, range
Sterility Testing Media	BacT/ALERT culture media, BACTEC media	Detection of microbial contaminants in final product	Growth promotion, absence of inhibitory substances
Endotoxin Testing Reagents	LAL reagents, recombinant Factor C	Detection and quantification of bacterial endotoxins	Sensitivity, standardization, validation for cell-based interference
Potency Assay Reagents	Cytokine detection antibodies, flow cytometry antibodies, cell-based assay reagents	Measure biological activity of the cell therapy product	Specificity, accuracy, precision, robustness
Mycoplasma Detection	PCR-based detection kits, culture-based methods	Detection of mycoplasma contamination	Limit of detection, inclusivity, exclusivity

Contractual and Quality Agreements

Establishing Robust Contractual Frameworks

The complex supply chains involved in cell therapy development necessitate comprehensive contractual agreements between all parties. According to EU GMP requirements, a written contract must be established between the Contract Giver and the Contract Acceptor [4]. When the Marketing Authorization Holder (MAH) and manufacturer are not the same, appropriate arrangements must be in place that define roles and responsibilities throughout the supply chain [4].

A direct written contract should exist between the MAH and the Manufacturing Import Authorization (MIA) holder responsible for QP certification of the product [4]. Additionally, a direct written contract should be in place between the MIA holder responsible for QP certification and sites involved in various stages of manufacture, importation, testing, and storage of a batch before certification [4]. It is also acceptable to have a direct written contract between multiple parties, provided relevant activities and responsibilities for each entity are clearly defined [4].

In certain cases, a "chain of contracts" setup may be acceptable instead of direct written contracts, but this requires adherence to specific principles including robust communication protocols, access to all contracts in the chain by the MIA holder, written acceptance of arrangements by the MIA holder, audit rights over all parties, and reflection of all parties in the supply chain diagram [4].

Technical and Quality Agreements

Technical and quality agreements are mandatory under European GMPs and must clearly define the responsibilities of all parties [19]. These agreements should establish delivery notice periods, turnaround times for reporting results, and lines of communication—particularly for unexpected or out-of-specification results and deviations [19].

Given the long-term nature of batch release arrangements, these agreements should include appropriate termination clauses that allow sufficient time for manufacturers to change testing laboratories (which requires an amendment to the MAA) and for contractors to replace the work [19]. Built-in review mechanisms with established maximum periods between reviews help maintain alignment between parties as products and regulations evolve [19].

For cell therapies specifically, quality agreements must address the unique aspects of these products, including stability constraints, two-stage release procedures, and contingency plans for adverse QC results post-release. The agreements should clearly define communication protocols for notifying clinical sites if quality issues are identified after product administration, ensuring compliance with pharmacovigilance obligations [17].

Emerging Trends and Regulatory Evolution

The regulatory landscape for cell therapy batch release continues to evolve in response to technological advances and accumulating experience with these complex products. Several key developments are shaping the future of quarantine management and logistical planning:

The European Commission is currently updating EudraLex Volume 4 - Good Manufacturing Practice guidelines, with revisions to Chapter 4, Annex 11, and a new Annex 22 addressing Artificial Intelligence in pharmaceutical manufacturing [21]. These updates aim to support innovation while ensuring regulatory harmonization, with a consultation deadline of October 7, 2025 [21]. For ATMP developers, these changes may provide more flexible frameworks for managing quarantine through digital systems and advanced monitoring technologies.

The International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) has issued draft guidance on adaptive designs for clinical trials (ICH E20), allowing pre-specified modifications of trial design based on interim analysis [21]. While focused on clinical development, this adaptive approach may eventually extend to quality control strategies, potentially enabling more efficient batch release processes for cell therapies. The draft guideline is open for consultation until November 30, 2025 [21].

In the United States, the FDA has eliminated Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) for currently approved BCMA- and CD19-directed autologous CAR-T cell immunotherapies, removing requirements for specially certified treatment sites and on-site immediate access to tocilizumab [21]. While this specific change applies to the US market, it reflects growing confidence in managing risks associated with advanced therapies and may influence future EU regulatory approaches.

For developers navigating this evolving landscape, the EMA offers formal support through scientific advice procedures with fee reductions of 65% for ATMPs (90% for small and medium-sized enterprises) [9]. Additionally, the Innovation Task Force provides a forum for early-stage dialogue between developers and regulators, offering opportunities to address quarantine and logistical challenges before finalizing batch release strategies [9].

Comparing Centralized vs. Hospital Exemption Pathways

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), encompassing gene therapies, cell therapies, and tissue-engineered products, represent a groundbreaking class of medicines within the European Union (EU). Their regulatory approval follows two distinct pathways: the centralized Marketing Authorization (MA) procedure for products intended for broad market placement, and the Hospital Exemption (HE) pathway for non-routine, custom-made products used within a specific member state [22] [23]. The centralized pathway is mandatory for ATMPs prepared industrially or by an industrial process, requiring evaluation by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and authorization by the European Commission for market access across the entire EU [23]. Conversely, the HE pathway, established under Article 28 of the ATMP Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007, provides an exemption from the centralized procedure for ATMPs prepared on a non-routine basis and used within a single member state under the exclusive professional responsibility of a medical practitioner [22] [24]. This application note provides a detailed comparative analysis of these two pathways, focusing on their regulatory requirements, quality standards, and implications for the batch certification process within EU research on cell therapy products.

Regulatory Framework and Key Definitions

Centralized Marketing Authorization Pathway

The centralized pathway is the standard regulatory route for ATMPs intended for the EU market. It falls under the scope of Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, requiring a single Marketing Authorization Application (MAA) evaluated by the EMA's Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) and Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) [23]. A successful MA grants permission to market the product in all EU member states. As of early 2025, this pathway has resulted in the authorization of 19 ATMPs, with the vast majority (84.2%) being gene therapy medicinal products (GTMPs) [2].

Hospital Exemption Pathway

The HE pathway is a derogation from the standard rules, defined in Article 3(7) of Directive 2001/83/EC. It applies to ATMPs that are "prepared on a non-routine basis according to specific quality standards, and used within the same Member State in a hospital under the exclusive professional responsibility of a medical practitioner, in order to comply with an individual medical prescription for a custom-made product for an individual patient" [22] [25]. These products are not subject to the centralized MA procedure but must be authorized by the national competent authority of the member state where they are manufactured and used [22]. The implementation of the HE pathway varies significantly across member states, leading to a fragmented regulatory landscape [25].

Table 1: Core Definitions and Legal Bases of ATMP Pathways

Aspect	Centralized MA Pathway	Hospital Exemption Pathway
Legal Basis	Directive 2001/83/EC; Regulation (EC) No 726/2004; ATMP Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 [23]	Article 28 of ATMP Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007; Article 3(7) of Directive 2001/83/EC [22] [24]
Governing Scope	EU-wide market access [23]	Use within a single Member State [22]
Key Objective	Ensure quality, safety, & efficacy for broad patient populations [23]	Address individual patient needs, often for rare conditions or unmet medical needs [24]
Core Concept	"Prepared industrially or manufactured by a method involving an industrial process" [22]	"Prepared on a non-routine basis" and "custom-made for an individual patient" [22]

Comparative Analysis of Pathway Requirements

The Centralized MA and HE pathways differ substantially in their regulatory, quality, and operational requirements. The table below provides a detailed comparison of these critical aspects, highlighting the distinct obligations for developers and manufacturers under each route.

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of Centralized MA and Hospital Exemption Pathways

Requirement	Centralized MA Pathway	Hospital Exemption Pathway
Regulatory Oversight	EMA (CAT, CHMP) and European Commission [23]	National Competent Authority (e.g., AEMPS in Spain, FAMHP in Belgium) [2] [22]
Geographical Validity	All EU Member States and EEA countries [2]	Only within the Member State of manufacture [22]
Authorization Process	Centralized procedure culminating in a Marketing Authorization [23]	National approval process; no MA required [25]
Evidence Requirements	Comprehensive data on quality, non-clinical, and clinical aspects (Phases I-III) to demonstrate safety and efficacy for a defined population [23]	Varies by Member State; can range from minimal evidence to requirements similar to MA (e.g., Spanish Model) [26] [24]
Quality & GMP Standards	Must comply with full GMP guidelines, including the specific GMP for ATMPs (Part IV of EudraLex Vol. 4) [8] [9]	Must adhere to specific quality standards; GMP requirements are mandated at the national level but must be "equivalent" to EU standards for ATMPs [22]
Pharmacovigilance & Traceability	EU-wide system mandatory [23]	National systems required, must be equivalent to EU standards [22]
Economic Considerations	High development costs; lengthy pricing & reimbursement negotiations per Member State [2]	Lower financial barriers for public hospitals; potential struggle for reimbursement from public health insurance [2]
Intended Use	Routine, broader patient populations [23]	Non-routine, individual patients, often for unmet medical needs or rare diseases [24]

Batch Certification and Quality Control Protocols

The Role of the Qualified Person in Batch Certification

In both the Centralized MA and HE pathways, the Qualified Person (QP) plays a critical role in the batch certification process before the product is released for use. The QP is legally responsible for ensuring that each batch of the ATMP has been manufactured and tested in compliance with GMP standards, the marketing authorization (for centralized products), and the relevant national regulations (for HE products) [8]. For HE products, the national traceability and quality standards must be equivalent to those required for centrally authorized ATMPs [22].

Protocol: Quality Control and Batch Release for a Cell Therapy Product

This protocol outlines the key steps for quality control and batch release applicable to both development pathways, with specific notes on pathway differences.

Objective: To ensure that each batch of the cell therapy product meets predefined specifications for identity, purity, potency, and safety before release for clinical use.

Materials and Reagents: Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Therapy QC Testing

Reagent / Material	Function / Application
Flow Cytometry Antibody Panels	Characterize cell surface markers for identity and purity analysis.
Cell Culture Media (Serum-free)	Support cell viability and function during potency assays.
qPCR/PCR Reagents	Detect specific genetic sequences for identity (e.g., CAR transgene) and safety (e.g., mycoplasma, adventitious viruses).
LAL Endotoxin Test Kit	Quantify bacterial endotoxins as a critical safety test.
Viability Stains (e.g., Trypan Blue, 7-AAD)	Distinguish between live and dead cells for viability and potency assessments.
Cytokine ELISA/MSD Kits	Measure cytokine secretion in response to stimulation as a potency assay.

Methodology:

• In-Process Controls (IPCs): Monitor critical parameters during manufacturing (e.g., cell count, viability, metabolic activity) to ensure process consistency.
• Batch Record Review: The QP thoroughly reviews the complete batch manufacturing record to verify adherence to approved procedures and GMP.
• Quality Control Testing: a. Identity: Confirm the presence of the intended cell population using methods like flow cytometry or PCR. b. Purity: Assess the percentage of the target cell population and the level of impurities (e.g., unwanted cell types). c. Potency: Measure the biological activity of the product through a validated bioassay (e.g., cytotoxic activity, cytokine release). This is a critical quality attribute. d. Viability: Determine the percentage of live cells in the final product. e. Safety Testing: Perform sterility, mycoplasma, and endotoxin testing. For HE products, compliance with EU Tissue and Cell Directives for starting materials is also required [9].
• QP Certification and Batch Release: Upon satisfactory completion of all tests and review of documentation, the QP certifies the batch. For centralized MA products, this release is for the EU market. For HE products, release is only valid within the member state.

Logical Workflow for ATMP Pathway Selection and Certification

The following diagram illustrates the decision-making process for selecting the appropriate regulatory pathway and the subsequent steps leading to batch certification and patient administration.

Discussion and Concluding Remarks

The choice between the Centralized MA and Hospital Exemption pathways is strategic, with significant implications for research direction, resource allocation, and patient access. The Centralized MA pathway offers the potential for broad EU market access but involves a complex, resource-intensive process with high evidentiary standards, making it suitable for products with significant commercial potential [23]. In contrast, the HE pathway is a vital tool for public health institutions and academia to provide treatments for rare diseases, unmet medical needs, or specific patient subgroups not served by industry, fostering innovation within the healthcare system [2] [24].

A key challenge is the heterogeneous implementation of the HE pathway across member states, leading to regulatory fragmentation and potential unequal patient access [22] [25]. Ongoing reforms of EU pharmaceutical legislation, including proposals for enhanced data collection and EMA oversight of HE products, aim to harmonize standards and improve transparency while preserving the pathway's essential role [22] [25]. For researchers and developers, early engagement with regulatory bodies via scientific advice (for MA) or understanding national requirements (for HE) is crucial for navigating these complex pathways and successfully advancing cell therapy products from the laboratory to the patient.

Implementing Robust Quality Control and Testing for Batch Release

For cell therapy products (CTPs) being developed for the European Union market, the establishment and control of Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) are fundamental to successful batch certification and regulatory approval. CQAs are defined as physical, chemical, biological, or microbiological properties or characteristics that must be within an appropriate limit, range, or distribution to ensure the desired product quality [27]. Within the EU regulatory framework for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), which includes CTPs, the batch certification process involves rigorous verification by a Qualified Person (QP) to ensure that every batch meets these predefined quality standards and Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) before release [6] [7]. This document details the practical application notes and experimental protocols for monitoring the four core CQAs—Identity, Purity, Potency, and Safety—providing a structured approach for researchers and drug development professionals.

Defining CQAs for Cell Therapy Products

The inherent complexity and variability of living cells as therapeutic agents necessitate a robust and nuanced approach to defining CQAs. The specific assays required can vary significantly based on the type of cell therapy (e.g., pluripotent, multipotent, unipotent) and its mechanism of action [27]. The table below summarizes the core CQAs and their general definitions for CTPs.

Table 1: Core Critical Quality Attributes for Cell Therapy Products

CQA	Definition	Key Question for the Product
Identity	The product contains the intended cellular components. [27]	Is my product what I think it is? [27]
Potency	The product has the biological function relevant to treating the clinical indication. [27]	Is my product able to fulfill its intended purpose? [27]
Purity	The product is free from process-related impurities (e.g., proteins, DNA, vectors, culture reagents, unwanted cells). [27]	-
Safety	The product is free from viable adventitious agents (e.g., mycoplasma, bacteria, viruses) and foreign matter (e.g., endotoxins). [27]	Is my product contaminated with other organisms? [27]

The relationship between the starting materials, the manufacturing process, and the final product's CQAs is dynamic. Inherent heterogeneity in patient/donor characteristics and variations in expansion processes can significantly impact the final product profile, making in-process testing and characterization critical [28] [27]. The following workflow outlines the logical progression from sample preparation to CQA verification.

Advanced Analytical Approaches: Next-Generation Sequencing

Traditional methods for establishing CQAs often rely on a battery of distinct assays, leading to challenges in standardization, high material consumption, and prolonged timelines [27]. Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) has emerged as a transformative multi-attribute method that can streamline the characterization of CTPs by addressing multiple CQAs simultaneously through a range of innovative approaches [27].

Replacing multiple conventional assays with a comprehensive NGS-based method can reduce the number of required assays from approximately 20 to just 4 [27]. This consolidation preserves valuable biological material, decreases costs, and accelerates the timeline for Investigational New Drug (IND) applications [27]. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has recognized the value of NGS, as evidenced by its request for NGS data to assure vector genome integrity in the gene therapy Zolgensma [27].

Table 2: NGS Applications for Monitoring CQAs of Cell Therapies

NGS Method	Primary CQA Application	Specific Application and Measurable Output
Single-cell RNA-Seq (scRNA-seq)	Identity, Potency	Examines cellular heterogeneity; confirms cell type and critical functional pathways. [27]
Targeted Locus Amplification (TLA)	Identity, Safety	Verifies genetic integrity, gene integration sites, and copy number; assesses risk of insertional mutagenesis. [27]
NGS for Adventitious Agents	Safety	Detects contaminating microorganisms (e.g., viruses, mycoplasma, bacteria) in a single, untargeted assay. [27]

Protocol: A Multi-Attribute NGS Workflow for CQA Assessment

This protocol provides a generalized framework for using NGS to characterize CTPs.

I. Title: Comprehensive Characterization of Cell Therapy Products Using Next-Generation Sequencing. II. Objective: To simultaneously assess the Identity, Potency, Purity, and Safety of a CTP through a consolidated NGS workflow. III. Experimental Workflow:

The following diagram details the key stages of the experimental protocol, from sample processing to data-driven decision-making.

IV. Materials and Equipment:

• Cell Therapy Product Sample.
• NGS Library Preparation Kits: For example, single-cell RNA-seq kit (e.g., 10x Genomics), TLA kit (Cergentis).
• NGS Instrument: Platform such as Illumina NovaSeq or MiSeq.
• Bioinformatic Software Platform: For example, Genedata Selector, which automates data processing, analysis, and visualization. [27]
• Computational Infrastructure: High-performance computing resources for handling large NGS datasets.

V. Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Extract high-quality nucleic acids (total RNA, gDNA) or prepare single-cell suspensions from the CTP, following manufacturer protocols for the chosen NGS methods.
• Library Preparation: Construct sequencing libraries for the desired applications (e.g., scRNA-seq, TLA, metagenomic sequencing for adventitious agents). Barcode samples to enable multiplexing.
• Sequencing: Load libraries onto the NGS platform and perform high-throughput sequencing to achieve adequate coverage and depth for confident analysis.
• Data Analysis: Process raw sequencing data through the bioinformatic platform:
  • Identity/Potency: For scRNA-seq data, perform clustering analysis to identify cell populations and differential expression analysis to confirm critical functional pathways. [27]
  • Safety (Genetic Integrity): For TLA data, map integration sites and determine vector copy number to assess genomic stability and risk. [27]
  • Safety (Sterility): Align sequence reads against databases of microbial genomes to identify any contaminating adventitious agents. [27]
• Reporting and Decision: Use the software platform to generate automated, GMP-compliant reports that compile evidence for all CQAs, supporting batch release decisions and regulatory submissions. [27]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The following table lists key reagents and materials essential for conducting robust CQA analysis in the development of CTPs.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for CQA Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function in CQA Analysis
GMP-Grade Cell Culture Media	Provides a consistent, high-quality, and defined environment for cell expansion, ensuring product consistency and safety. [29]
NGS Library Preparation Kits	Enable the conversion of cellular nucleic acids into sequencer-compatible libraries for identity, potency, and safety testing. [27]
CRISPR Reagents	Used for genetic manipulation of cells; requires careful characterization of editing outcomes (Identity, Safety). [27]
Viral Vectors	Serve as delivery systems for genetic material; their integrity, titer, and purity are critical CQAs for gene therapies. [27]
Flow Cytometry Antibodies	Allow for characterization of cell surface and intracellular markers, contributing to assessments of Identity and Purity.
Reference Standards	Provide well-characterized controls for assay validation and calibration, ensuring data quality and comparability across batches.

The path to successful batch certification of a cell therapy product in the EU is underpinned by a rigorous, science-driven understanding of its Critical Quality Attributes. The adoption of innovative, multi-attribute methods like Next-Generation Sequencing offers a powerful strategy to streamline CQA assessment, replacing a complex web of assays with a more efficient, informative, and standardized approach. By implementing the detailed application notes and protocols outlined in this document, developers of CTPs can generate the comprehensive, high-quality data required to satisfy regulatory requirements, support QP batch certification, and ultimately ensure that safe and effective therapies reach patients.

Within the European Union, cell therapy products are classified as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) and are subject to a robust batch certification process to ensure patient safety and product efficacy [30] [31]. This process mandates that every product batch undergoes rigorous quality control (QC) testing before release for clinical use. The European regulatory framework, particularly Regulation (EC) 1394/2007, establishes the requirements for the authorization, supervision, and pharmacovigilance of ATMPs [30]. Core to this framework is the demonstration of product safety through essential QC tests, including sterility, mycoplasma, endotoxin, and viability testing. These tests are critical for preventing patient exposure to potential contaminants and for ensuring the therapeutic product is viable and functional. This document details the application notes and experimental protocols for these essential tests within the context of EU research and development.

Regulatory Context in the EU

In the EU, ATMPs must be approved via the Centralized Procedure through the European Medicines Agency (EMA) [30]. The Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) is responsible for assessing the quality, safety, and efficacy of ATMPs [30]. Furthermore, production must adhere to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards, which require a clear separation of quality control functions from production and oversight by a Qualified Person (QP) who is ultimately responsible for certifying each batch for release [31] [18].

The "hospital exemption" clause allows for the non-routine manufacture of ATMPs within a specific member state, but these products must still meet equivalent quality and safety standards [32] [31]. For academic institutions and researchers, this means implementing a pharmaceutical quality management system that integrates these essential QC tests, even for small-scale production [32].

Table 1: Key EU Regulatory Bodies and Guidelines for ATMP QC Testing

Regulatory Body / Document	Relevance to QC Testing
European Medicines Agency (EMA)	Provides overarching guidelines for ATMP development and approval [10].
Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT)	Prepares draft opinions on ATMP marketing authorizations [30].
European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur.)	Defines standard monographs and methods for quality testing of medicinal products [32] [33].
Regulation (EC) 1394/2007	Lays down specific rules for ATMP authorization, supervision, and pharmacovigilance [30] [31].
Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP)	Ensures products are consistently produced and controlled according to quality standards [31].

Essential Quality Control Tests

Sterility Testing

Application Notes: Sterility testing is a critical release test to demonstrate that the cell therapy product is free from viable microorganisms. Given the short shelf life of many fresh cell therapy products (e.g., 48-72 hours), traditional compendial methods with a 14-day incubation period are often not feasible [32]. In such cases, rapid microbiological methods (RMM) may be employed as an alternative, provided they are properly validated against the pharmacopoeial methods to demonstrate equivalent or superior sensitivity and reliability [32]. The test should be performed on the final product, or as an in-process test if justified.

Mycoplasma Testing

Application Notes: Mycoplasma contamination is a significant risk for cell-based products, as these organisms can alter cell function and pose a safety risk to patients. The European Pharmacopoeia (Chapter 2.6.7) defines the reference test, which involves culture in both broth and agar, and an indicator cell culture method, taking 28 days [32]. Due to the short shelf-life of many cell therapies, validated Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques (NAT) are widely accepted as a suitable alternative [32].

Table 2: Key Criteria for Selecting a Mycoplasma NAT Method [32]

Criterion	Description and Requirement
DNA Extraction Compatibility	The extraction method must be compatible with the amplification technique and be part of the overall validation.
Validation Matrix	The test should be validated for both cell suspensions and culture supernatants.
Detection of Relevant Strains	The method must detect a panel of mycoplasma strains as recommended by the Ph. Eur.
Sensitivity/Limit of Detection	The test must be able to detect at least 10 CFU/mL for each targeted strain.
Specificity	The method must have high specificity to prevent false-positive results from bacterial DNA cross-reactivity.

Experimental Protocol: Mycoplasma Detection via NAT

• Sample Preparation: Aseptically collect a representative sample of at least 1-2 mL from the cell culture supernatant or a washed cell suspension.
• DNA Extraction: Use a commercial DNA extraction kit that has been validated for use with the selected NAT method. Include both positive and negative extraction controls.
• Amplification and Detection: Perform the nucleic acid amplification using a validated commercial kit or an in-house validated method (e.g., qPCR).
  • Positive Control: Use a defined amount of mycoplasma DNA (e.g., from M. orale or M. pneumoniae).
  • Negative Control: Use nuclease-free water.
  • Inhibition Control: "Spike" a separate aliquot of the test sample with a known, low level of mycoplasma DNA to confirm the absence of PCR inhibitors.
• Analysis: The sample is considered negative if the amplification signal is below the validated threshold for the positive control.

Mycoplasma NAT Testing Workflow

Endotoxin Testing

Application Notes: Endotoxins, derived from the cell walls of Gram-negative bacteria, are pyrogenic and can cause fever and shock in patients. The Limulus Amebocyte Lysate (LAL) test is the standard method, with several formats available: gel-clot, turbidimetric, and chromogenic [32]. The Recombinant Factor C (rFC) assay is an animal-free alternative that is gaining regulatory acceptance and is considered ethical and eco-friendly [33]. It is critical to perform a validation study to demonstrate that the test method does not suffer from matrix interference from the cell therapy product itself.

Experimental Protocol: Endotoxin Testing via LAL Chromogenic Assay

• Sample Preparation: Dilute the cell therapy product sample as necessary using endotoxin-free water or buffer. The dilution must be validated to overcome inhibition or enhancement.
• Preparation of Standards: Prepare a series of endotoxin standards from a certified Reference Standard Endotoxin (RSE).
• Test Procedure:
  • Pipette LAL reagent into endotoxin-free tubes.
  • Add the prepared sample, standards, and controls (negative water control, positive product control - PPC) to the tubes.
  • Incubate the mixture at 37°C for a specified time (e.g., 10-15 minutes).
  • Add a chromogenic substrate and stop the reaction after a set period.
• Analysis: Measure the absorbance of the samples and standards. The endotoxin concentration in the test sample is calculated by comparing its absorbance to the standard curve. The batch is released only if the endotoxin level is below the specified limit (e.g., < 5.0 EU/kg/hr for intravenous products, though specific limits should be justified for the product and route of administration).

Viability Testing

Application Notes: Viability is a critical quality attribute that indicates the proportion of live cells in the final product, directly impacting dosing and potential efficacy. While not a sterility test, it is essential for characterizing the product. Flow cytometry using fluorescent dyes is the preferred method for cell therapies as it provides a rapid and quantitative result. The FDA and USP Chapter <87> provide guidance on method suitability, though adherence to Ph. Eur. methods is required in the EU [34]. The choice of dye (e.g., 7-AAD, propidium iodide) and the inclusion of a viability standard are important for assay validation.

Experimental Protocol: Viability Testing via Flow Cytometry

• Staining: Mix a precise volume of the cell suspension with a fluorescent viability dye (e.g., 7-AAD) that is excluded by live cells. Incubate in the dark for 10-15 minutes.
• Setup and Calibration: Use fluorescent beads to calibrate the flow cytometer. Establish a gate for live cells based on forward and side scatter properties.
• Acquisition: Acquire a minimum of 10,000 events per sample. Use unstained cells and single-stained controls to set up compensation and voltage.
• Analysis: The viability is calculated as the percentage of cells that are negative for the viability dye: (Number of Viable Cells / Total Number of Cells) × 100%. A minimum viability threshold (e.g., >70%) is often set as a batch release criterion.

Table 3: Summary of Essential QC Tests for Batch Release

Test	Objective	Common Methods	Key Acceptance Criteria
Sterility	Ensure absence of viable bacteria and fungi	Direct inoculation, Membrane filtration, Rapid Micro Methods	No growth of microorganisms [34]
Mycoplasma	Ensure absence of mycoplasma contamination	Culture (Ph. Eur. 2.6.7), Validated NAT	Negative for mycoplasma [32]
Endotoxin	Quantify bacterial endotoxins	LAL (gel-clot, turbidimetric, chromogenic), rFC assay	Below specified limit (e.g., < 5.0 EU/kg/hr) [34]
Viability	Determine percentage of live cells	Flow cytometry (7-AAD), Trypan Blue exclusion	Meets specified threshold (e.g., >70%)

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

The quality of raw materials is paramount for the consistent production of cell therapies. Manufacturers are responsible for qualifying all GMP raw materials [34].

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents for QC Testing

Reagent / Kit	Function in QC Testing
GMP-grade Cytokines (e.g., IL-2)	Used as growth factor supplements in cell expansion; require low endotoxin and high purity [34].
Validated Mycoplasma NAT Kit	For the rapid and sensitive detection of mycoplasma contamination; must be validated per Ph. Eur. [32].
LAL or rFC Endotoxin Assay Kit	For the quantification of bacterial endotoxins in the final product [32] [33].
Viability Dyes (e.g., 7-AAD, PI)	Fluorescent dyes used in flow cytometry to distinguish live cells from dead cells.
Residual DNA Quantification Kit	qPCR-based kits to detect and quantify trace amounts of host cell DNA, a critical process impurity [34].
Nucleases (GMP-grade)	Enzymes used to remove unwanted nucleic acids (a process impurity) during the manufacturing process [34].

The implementation of robust, validated testing protocols for sterility, mycoplasma, endotoxin, and viability is a non-negotiable requirement for the batch certification of cell therapy products in the EU. Adherence to the European Pharmacopoeia, GMP standards, and EMA guidelines ensures that these innovative therapies meet the highest thresholds for patient safety and product quality. As the field evolves with trends towards point-of-care manufacturing and the use of artificial intelligence in regulatory oversight, these fundamental QC tests will remain the cornerstone of delivering safe and effective cell therapies to patients [35]. Researchers and developers must engage early with regulatory authorities and utilize high-quality, well-documented reagents to streamline the path from the laboratory to the clinic.

In the European Union, the batch certification process for cell therapy products, classified as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), requires rigorous quality control to ensure patient safety and therapeutic efficacy [36] [37]. The qualification and validation of analytical methods for quantifying critical quality attributes are fundamental to this process. Vector Copy Number (VCN) and cell count represent two essential quantitative measures that define product dose, a key parameter in batch release specifications [32] [38].

VCN assays quantify the number of integrated vector copies per cell, confirming successful genetic modification and serving as a critical safety parameter to prevent insertional mutagenesis [39]. Concurrently, validated cell counting methods ensure accurate dosing of viable, functional cells, directly impacting therapeutic outcomes [40] [38]. For Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) manufactured under the hospital exemption clause, demonstrating validated, robust methods for these parameters is mandatory for certification by a Qualified Person (QP) [15] [32]. This document details application notes and experimental protocols for validating VCN and cell count assays within the EU regulatory framework.

Regulatory Framework and Key Concepts

The EU regulatory framework for ATMPs, including cell therapies, is established by Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 [37]. Batch release must comply with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), specifically EU GMP Annex 16, which outlines the requirements for certification by a Qualified Person [15]. Furthermore, the "hospital exemption" pathway allows ATMPs prepared on a non-routine basis to be used within a single Member State, provided they meet equivalent quality standards [32] [37].

Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) and Analytical Target Profile (ATP)

For a cell therapy product, CQAs are physical, chemical, biological, or microbiological properties that must be within an appropriate limit, range, or distribution to ensure the desired product quality [41]. VCN and viable cell count are pivotal CQAs. The ATP is a predefined objective that defines the required quality of the reportable result from an analytical procedure. For a VCN assay, the ATP would specify the performance requirements for precision, accuracy, and range [41].

Validation of Vector Copy Number (VCN) Assay

The VCN is typically quantified using digital PCR (dPCR) or quantitative PCR (qPCR), with dPCR becoming the preferred method due to its absolute quantification without the need for a standard curve and its superior precision and accuracy [39] [42] [32].

Experimental Protocol: Duplex Droplet Digital PCR (ddPCR) for VCN

This protocol outlines the validation of a duplex ddPCR assay targeting the transgene (e.g., WPRE) and a reference single-copy gene (e.g., RPP30) [39] [42].

Materials and Equipment

• Genomic DNA extracted from the cell therapy product.
• ddPCR Supermix for Probes (no dUTP).
• Primers and TaqMan Probes for the transgene (FAM-labeled) and reference gene (HEX/VIC-labeled).
• Reference Standard: A synthetic DNA hybrid amplicon containing both transgene and reference gene amplicons is a cost-effective and qualified alternative to plasmid or cell line standards [39].
• Droplet Generator and Droplet Reader (e.g., Bio-Rad QX200 system).
• Thermal Cycler.
• Source DNA and Reagents: The DNA extraction method must be specified and consistent. All reagents should be GMP-certified where applicable [32].

Procedure

• DNA Extraction and Quantification: Extract genomic DNA from the cell pellet using a validated method. Precisely quantify DNA using a fluorometric method (e.g., Qubit dsDNA HS assay) [42].
• Reaction Setup: Prepare a duplex ddPCR reaction mix containing:
  • 1× ddPCR Supermix
  • Primers and probes at optimized concentrations (e.g., 900 nM primers, 250 nM probes)
  • DNA template (e.g., 20-500 ng) and nuclease-free water to volume.
• Droplet Generation: Transfer the reaction mix to a DG8 cartridge for droplet generation.
• PCR Amplification: Transfer the generated droplets to a 96-well plate and run the following thermal cycling protocol:
  • 95°C for 10 minutes (enzyme activation)
  • 40 cycles of: 94°C for 30 seconds and 60°C for 60 seconds (annealing/extension)
  • 98°C for 10 minutes (enzyme deactivation)
  • 4°C hold.
• Droplet Reading and Analysis: Read the plate on the droplet reader. Analyze the data using the associated software to determine the copies/μL of the transgene and reference gene in the original reaction.
• VCN Calculation: VCN = (Copies/μL of Transgene) / (Copies/μL of Reference Gene)

Assay Validation Parameters

The following table summarizes the validation parameters and acceptance criteria for a VCN assay, based on regulatory guidance and published studies [39] [42] [32].

Table 1: Validation Parameters for a VCN ddPCR Assay

Validation Parameter	Experimental Procedure	Acceptance Criteria
Precision	Analyze at least three concentration levels (low, mid, high) with multiple replicates (n≥3) across different days, operators, and equipment.	Repeatability (Intra-assay): CV < 10-15% Intermediate Precision (Inter-assay): CV < 15-20% [39] [42]
Accuracy/Bias	Spike recovery using a known quantity of reference standard (e.g., hybrid amplicon) into a background of genomic DNA.	% Recovery: 80-120% [39]
Linearity & Range	Analyze a series of DNA inputs across the expected range (e.g., 5 ng to 500 ng).	Linearity: R² > 0.98 over the validated range [39] [42]
Specificity	Test DNA samples known to be negative for the transgene. Ensure no positive droplets are detected in the FAM channel.	No false positive signals in negative samples.
Robustness	Deliberately vary method parameters (e.g., annealing temperature ±1°C, reagent volumes ±5%).	The method remains unaffected by small, deliberate variations.

Diagram 1: VCN ddPCR assay validation workflow.

Validation of Cell Count and Viability Assays

Cell count and viability are fundamental release criteria, ensuring the patient receives a dose of viable, functional cells [40]. The UNITC consortium position paper highlights the need for standardized quality control processes for academic production of CAR-T cells, which includes cell counting and viability [32].

Experimental Protocol: Viable Cell Count Using Flow Cytometry

Flow cytometry using vital dyes (e.g., 7-AAD, DAPI) provides an accurate count of viable cells based on membrane integrity and is applicable to characterizing complex cell products like CAR-T cells [40].

Materials and Equipment

• Single-cell suspension of the cell therapy product.
• Vital Stain: e.g., 7-Aminoactinomycin D (7-AAD) or Propidium Iodide (PI).
• Flow Cytometer with appropriate lasers and filters.
• Counting Beads (optional, for absolute counting).
• Isotonic Buffer: e.g., PBS.

Procedure

• Sample Preparation: Ensure a single-cell suspension. Dilute the sample appropriately in isotonic buffer to achieve a concentration within the linear range of the flow cytometer (e.g., 1-5 x 10^5 cells/mL).
• Staining: Mix 100 μL of cell suspension with 5-20 μL of vital stain (e.g., 7-AAD) as per manufacturer's instructions. Incubate for 5-20 minutes at 2-8°C in the dark.
• Data Acquisition:
  • If using counting beads, add a known volume and concentration of beads to the stained sample immediately before acquisition.
  • Set up the flow cytometer. Use forward scatter (FSC) vs. side scatter (SSC) to gate on the cell population.
  • Acquire a sufficient number of events (e.g., 10,000 cells or a fixed volume if using volumetric counting).
• Analysis:
  • Create a plot of FSC vs. fluorescence for the vital dye (e.g., 7-AAD).
  • Gate the viable cell population (FSC-high, dye-negative).
  • Without beads: % Viability = (Number of viable cells / Total number of cells) × 100.
  • With beads: Absolute viable cell count = (Number of viable cells / Number of beads) × Concentration of beads × Dilution factor.

Assay Validation Parameters

Table 2: Validation Parameters for a Cell Viability Flow Cytometry Assay

Validation Parameter	Experimental Procedure	Acceptance Criteria
Precision	Analyze samples with low, medium, and high viability in multiple replicates (n≥3) within a run and across different runs/days.	Repeatability: CV of % viability < 10% Intermediate Precision: CV of % viability < 15%
Accuracy	Compare results to a validated reference method (e.g., manual counting with Trypan Blue exclusion). Use samples with known high and low viability (e.g., heat-killed cells).	Correlation with reference method: R² > 0.90 % Recovery for low viability sample: >70%
Linearity & Range	Serially dilute a high-viability sample with a low-viability sample and analyze.	Linearity: R² > 0.95 over a viability range of 50% to 95%
Specificity	Use control samples: viable cells (dye-negative) and non-viable cells (e.g., heat-killed, dye-positive).	Clear discrimination between viable and non-viable populations.
Robustness	Vary staining incubation time (±5 minutes) and temperature (±2°C).	No significant impact on viability result.

Diagram 2: Cell count and viability assay validation workflow.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagent Solutions

The following table details essential materials and reagents required for implementing the VCN and cell count validation protocols.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for VCN and Cell Count Assays

Item	Function/Application	Key Considerations
Synthetic Hybrid Amplicon	Reference standard for ddPCR VCN assay qualification and validation [39].	Contains amplicons for both transgene (e.g., WPRE) and reference gene (e.g., RPP30). Must be qualified and sequence-verified.
ddPCR Supermix for Probes	Provides the PCR reagents, including enzymes and dNTPs, optimized for droplet digital PCR.	Ensure compatibility with the probe chemistry (e.g., no dUTP for TaqMan probes).
Primers & TaqMan Probes	Specifically amplify and detect the transgene and reference gene in a duplex reaction.	Probes for transgene and reference gene should be labeled with different fluorophores (e.g., FAM, HEX/VIC). Specificity and efficiency must be validated.
Fluorometric DNA Quantification Kit	Accurately measure the concentration of input genomic DNA for ddPCR.	More accurate for complex samples than spectrophotometry. Essential for reliable VCN results [42].
Vital Dyes (7-AAD/PI)	Discriminate viable from non-viable cells by staining DNA in cells with compromised membranes.	Must be titrated for optimal signal-to-noise. Requires flow cytometry for detection.
Counting Beads	Enable absolute cell counting by flow cytometry by providing a known reference per volume.	Beads must be fluorescently distinct from cells and compatible with the flow cytometer.
GMP-Grade Culture Reagents	Used in the manufacturing process of the cell therapy product upstream of QC testing.	Sourcing from GMP-certified suppliers is critical for regulatory compliance and final product quality [32].

Integration into the EU Batch Certification Process

For batch release of a cell therapy product in the EU, the data generated from validated VCN and cell count assays are compiled in the Batch Manufacturing and Quality Control Protocols. The Qualified Person (QP) relies on this data, along with other quality control tests (e.g., sterility, mycoplasma, potency, and identity), to certify the batch before release [15] [32]. The methods described herein, when validated according to the outlined principles, provide the robust and reliable data necessary for the QP to make this certification, ensuring the product meets its predefined quality attributes and is safe for patient administration. Adherence to a rigorous quality management system and relevant pharmacopoeial standards (European Pharmacopoeia) is paramount throughout this process [36] [32].

For cell-based therapies in the European Union, potency testing represents one of the most significant analytical and regulatory challenges in the batch certification process. Defined as the quantitative measure of the biological activity of a medicinal product, potency is considered a Critical Quality Attribute (CQA) that must be demonstrated for every batch of an Advanced Therapy Medicinal Product (ATMP) prior to release [43]. Unlike traditional pharmaceuticals, the complex and often multifunctional nature of cell therapies means that potency assays must reflect the product's Mechanism of Action (MoA) and ideally correlate with clinical response [43] [44]. This document outlines the scientific and regulatory framework for potency assay development specifically within the EU context, providing detailed protocols and analytical approaches to address these challenges for batch certification of cell therapy products.

Regulatory Expectations and Challenges in the EU

The regulatory foundation for potency testing of ATMPs in the EU is established in Directive 2001/83/EC and further detailed in various EMA guidelines [43] [45]. A key challenge for developers is that potency assays are expected to be quantitative, functional assays that can be validated according to International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) requirements for commercial release [43]. However, the EMA acknowledges the practical challenges and, unlike the US FDA, may allow the use of validated surrogate assays for release testing provided a functional assay is available for characterization and correlation between the assays can be demonstrated [43].

For cell-based immunotherapies, such as those for cancer treatment, the EMA requires potency testing strategies that capture the multifaceted biological activity of the product, which may include cytotoxicity, cytokine secretion, and cellular proliferation [46]. The regulatory expectations evolve through the product lifecycle, with increasing rigor required as products advance from early clinical trials to marketing authorization application [47].

Table: Key Regulatory Guidelines for Potency Testing of Cell Therapies in the EU

Regulatory Body	Guideline/Regulation	Key Focus Areas
European Medicines Agency (EMA)	Directive 2001/83/EC (ATMP Regulation)	Legal requirement for potency testing of all biological medicinal products [43].
EMA	Guideline on Human Cell-Based Medicinal Products	Overarching guidance on quality, non-clinical, and clinical aspects [43].
EMA	Guideline on Potency Testing of Cell-Based Immunotherapy for Cancer	Specific requirements for cancer immunotherapy products [43].
International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)	ICH Q6B	Defines specifications, test procedures, and acceptance criteria for biologics [43].

A significant hurdle is that nearly 50% of ATMP Marketing Authorization Applications (MAAs) in the EU encounter major issues with their potency tests, often related to a lack of robustness, validation, or inadequate reflection of the MoA [43]. This underscores the necessity of early and strategic assay development.

Analytical Strategies for Multifunctional Potency Assessment

Given that cell therapies frequently exert their effect through multiple mechanisms, a single potency assay is often insufficient. A combination of methods is typically required to fully characterize the biological activity of the product [43] [47]. The analytical strategy should be based on a thorough understanding of the product's MoA.

For example, Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell products require a multi-analyte potency approach that addresses the key steps of their therapeutic function: successful genetic modification, correct expression of the transgene, and effective functional output upon target engagement [47].

Table: Multi-Analyte Potency Approach for a CAR T-Cell Therapy

Target Attribute	Analytical Method	Function Measured
Genetic Modification	ddPCR / qPCR	Measures vector copy number, confirming successful delivery and integration of the therapeutic gene [47].
Transgene Expression	Flow Cytometry	Quantifies the percentage of cells expressing the CAR construct on the cell surface [47].
Functional Activity (Cytokine Release)	ELISA, ELLA, MSD	Measures release of effector cytokines (e.g., IFN-γ) upon antigen-specific activation [47].
Functional Activity (Cytotoxicity)	Luminescence / Flow Cytometry-Based Killing Assays	Quantifies the ability of the cells to lyse antigen-presenting target cells [47].

The complexity of these living products introduces substantial variability. Implementing measurement assurance strategies is critical to control this variability. Tools include using detailed measurement process flow diagrams, Ishikawa (cause-and-effect) diagrams, and rigorous design of experiments to identify and mitigate key sources of uncertainty [48]. Furthermore, establishing well-characterized reference materials and performance specifications for each assay provides a benchmark for reliability and reproducibility, though the living nature of cells presents unique challenges for their use as stable reference materials [48].

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Cytokine Release Potency Assay (e.g., for CAR T-Cells)

This protocol measures the antigen-specific release of Interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) as a functional potency readout for T-cell engaging therapies [47].

Research Reagent Solutions:

• Effector Cells: The CAR T-cell or TCR-modified T-cell therapy product.
• Target Cells: Antigen-presenting cell line (e.g., tumor cell line endogenously expressing the target antigen or engineered to do so). Must be tested for viability, genetic stability, and consistent antigen expression levels [47].
• Culture Medium: Appropriate assay medium, such as RPMI-1640 supplemented with fetal bovine serum.
• Detection Kit: Commercial IFN-γ ELISA kit (e.g., ELISA, ELLA, or MSD).

Methodology:

• Preparation: Thaw and rest effector cells if cryopreserved. Confirm viability and count. Maintain target cells in log-phase growth.
• Co-culture Setup: Seed target cells in a multi-well plate (e.g., 96-well) at a pre-optimized density (e.g., 50,000 cells/well). Add effector cells at a specified Effector-to-Target (E:T) ratio (e.g., 1:1, 2:1). Include control wells: effector cells alone (background), target cells alone (background), and a positive control (e.g., effector cells stimulated with PMA/ionomycin).
• Incubation: Incubate the co-culture plate for a defined period (e.g., 16-24 hours) at 37°C with 5% CO₂.
• Supernatant Collection: Centrifuge the plate and carefully collect the cell-free supernatant.
• Cytokine Quantification: Transfer the supernatant to a new plate and perform the IFN-γ measurement according to the manufacturer's instructions for the chosen detection kit.
• Data Analysis: Calculate the concentration of IFN-γ in test samples by interpolation from a standard curve. The result, expressed as pg/mL or normalized to unit cell number, serves as a quantitative measure of functional potency.

Protocol 2: Flow Cytometry-Based Transgene Expression Assay

This protocol quantifies the percentage of cells in the product that successfully express the therapeutic transgene (e.g., CAR).

Research Reagent Solutions:

• Cell Sample: The cell therapy product.
• Staining Antibodies: Fluorescently-conjugated antibody specific for the transgene protein (e.g., anti-F(ab')₂ for CAR detection) and relevant isotype control. Antibodies for phenotyping (e.g., anti-CD3, CD4, CD8).
• Staining Buffer: Phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) supplemented with bovine serum albumin (BSA).
• Fixation Solution: Commercially available cell fixation buffer (e.g., 1-4% paraformaldehyde).
• Flow Cytometer: Calibrated flow cytometer with appropriate lasers and filters.

Methodology:

• Sample Aliquoting: Aliquot a defined number of cells (e.g., 0.5-1.0 x 10⁶) into flow cytometry tubes.
• Staining: Wash cells with staining buffer. Resuspend cell pellet in staining buffer containing the predetermined optimal concentration of detection antibodies. Incubate for 20-30 minutes in the dark at 4°C.
• Washing and Fixation: Wash cells twice with staining buffer to remove unbound antibody. Resuspend the final cell pellet in fixation solution to preserve the stained cells.
• Acquisition: Acquire data on the flow cytometer, collecting a sufficient number of events (e.g., 10,000-50,000 live cell events) for robust statistical analysis.
• Gating and Analysis: Using flow cytometry analysis software, establish a sequential gating strategy to identify the population of interest (e.g., single cells > live cells > lymphocytes > T cells > CAR-positive cells). The percentage of CAR-positive cells is the key reportable result for this identity/potency attribute.

A Phase-Appropriate Lifecycle Approach to Potency

A successful potency strategy matures alongside the product's clinical development. The "fit-for-purpose" principle should be applied, where the level of assay characterization and validation is appropriate for the clinical phase [49] [47].

Table: Phase-Appropriate Potency Assay Development

Development Phase	Assay Goals & Characteristics	Regulatory Documentation
Preclinical to First-in-Human (FIH)	Develop multiple readouts (genetic, protein). Assays can be semi-quantitative with phase-appropriate specificity and sensitivity [47].	Methods are qualified; data supports initial safety trials [43].
Later Clinical Phases to Pivotal	Refine assays for quantitative readouts based on early clinical data. Identify and qualify critical reagents and reference standards. Develop MoA-reflective functional potency assays [47].	Assays are qualified for accuracy, precision, robustness. Used for lot release and stability for pivotal trials [43] [47].
Marketing Authorization Application (MAA)	Fully validate potency assays. Finalize acceptance criteria correlated with clinical experience. Ensure assays are stability-indicating [43] [47].	Comprehensive validation reports submitted in the MAA. Assays are validated for commercial lot release [43].

A critical tool for maintaining consistency throughout this lifecycle is the establishment and use of a reference standard. This standard, which can be a well-characterized batch of the product or a surrogate material, provides a consistent benchmark to compare the biological activity of production batches over time, enabling the reporting of relative potency [48] [47].

Developing robust potency assays for cell therapy products destined for the EU market is a complex but surmountable challenge. Success hinges on a deep understanding of the product's MoA, the implementation of a multi-analyte testing strategy, and the adoption of a phase-appropriate, science-driven approach aligned with EU regulatory expectations. By investing early in a well-defined potency strategy that incorporates functional, identity, and quality assays, developers can build a strong foundation for batch certification, ensure consistent product quality, and ultimately demonstrate the therapeutic value of their innovative ATMPs to regulators and patients.

Overcoming Common Hurdles in ATMP Batch Certification

Addressing Country-Specific Requirements and Regulatory Heterogeneity

For developers of cell therapy products, navigating the complex regulatory landscape of the European Union (EU) presents a significant challenge. The batch certification process stands as a critical gateway, ensuring that every product batch meets stringent quality and safety standards before use in clinical trials or the market. This process is governed by a framework of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) guidelines, with the specific requirements for these advanced therapies detailed in EudraLex Volume 4 [8]. The core of this process is the certification by a Qualified Person (QP), a legally mandated role responsible for ensuring that each batch has been manufactured and tested in full compliance with EU regulations [50] [6].

Understanding and addressing regulatory heterogeneity is paramount for successful research and development. Even within the unified EU framework, specific requirements can vary based on the product's classification and the stage of development. Furthermore, for research involving international collaboration, differences between major regions like the EU and the US must be considered. This document provides detailed application notes and protocols to guide researchers and drug development professionals through the intricacies of the EU batch certification process for cell therapies.

Regulatory Framework for ATMPs in the EU

Cell therapy products are classified as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) in the EU. This classification triggers specific regulatory requirements that build upon the standard rules for medicinal products. The overarching framework is defined in EudraLex Volume 4, which contains the Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) guidelines [8].

Key Legislation and Guidelines

The following table summarizes the core regulatory documents governing ATMPs and their batch certification in the EU.

Table 1: Key EU Regulatory Documents for ATMPs

Document / Legislation	Description	Relevance to ATMP Batch Certification
EudraLex Volume 4, Part IV [8]	Detailed GMP guidelines specific to Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products.	Adapts general GMP requirements to the specific characteristics of ATMPs, addressing novel and complex manufacturing scenarios.
Commission Directive 2001/83/EC [9]	Community code relating to medicinal products for human use.	Provides the foundational legal basis for manufacturing, including the requirement for QP certification.
Annex 13 of EudraLex Vol. 4 [8]	Detailed guidelines on GMP for Investigational Medicinal Products (IMPs).	Specifies the modified GMP and batch certification requirements for ATMPs used in clinical trials, as referenced in the Product Specification File.
Regulation (EU) 2019/6 [8]	Regulation on veterinary medicinal products.	While for veterinary use, it demonstrates the evolving and aligned nature of GMP requirements, which are relevant for certain comparative studies.
New EU SoHO Legislation [51]	Revised legislation for Substances of Human Origin (SoHOs).	Extends requirements to donor registration, collection, testing, and storage, impacting the quality of starting materials for cell therapies.

A crucial step in the development pathway is obtaining formal regulatory classification. In the EU, sponsors can submit a request for ATMP classification to the Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT), which typically responds within 60 days [51]. This classification determines the exact regulatory path and specific requirements for batch certification.

The Qualified Person (QP) and Batch Certification

The QP is a cornerstone of the EU quality system. Their duties involve a comprehensive review to ensure that each batch of a medicinal product is manufactured and controlled in accordance with several critical elements [50] [6]:

• The Marketing Authorisation (MA) or Clinical Trial Authorisation (CTA).
• EU GMP standards.
• For investigational products, the Product Specification File and the Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD).

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationships and workflow of the QP certification process for a cell therapy product.

Diagram 1: QP Batch Certification Workflow

Quantitative Data and Regulatory Timelines

Staying current with regulatory deadlines is critical for planning and resource allocation. The following table summarizes key upcoming dates and changes that may impact cell therapy developers.

Table 2: Key Regulatory Deadlines and Quantitative Data

Regulatory Element	Deadline / Timeline	Impact on Cell Therapy Development
GMP for Veterinary Products [8]	New rules apply from 16 July 2026.	Highlights the evolving nature of GMP; while for veterinary use, it signals trends in regulatory alignment.
Transition to EU SoHO Legislation [51]	Requirements must be met by 7 August 2027.	Critical for cell therapy developers using human tissues or cells. SoHO entities must ensure full compliance for donor material.
CAT Classification Request [51]	Response within 60 days.	Allows for relatively rapid formal classification, aiding in regulatory strategy planning.
Public Consultation on GMP Annexes [21]	Consultation closed on 7 October 2025.	Indicates future direction of GMP for digital tech and AI in manufacturing, which may affect advanced therapy production.

Experimental Protocol: QP Batch Certification for an Investigational Cell Therapy

This protocol outlines the detailed methodology for preparing for and executing the QP certification of a batch of an investigational cell therapy product (an ATMP) destined for a clinical trial in the EU.

Pre-Certification Preparation: Compiling the Product Specification File (PSF)

The PSF is a living document containing all relevant information to define the manufacturing and quality control of the investigational product.

Objective: To assemble and verify the completeness and accuracy of the PSF prior to batch certification. Materials:

• Manufacturing Documentation: Master Batch Record, executed batch records, and all associated protocols.
• Quality Control Data: Certificates of Analysis for all raw materials and the finished product, stability data, and validation reports for analytical methods.
• Facility & System Records: GMP facility licensure, equipment qualification and calibration records, and environmental monitoring data for the batch in question.

Procedure:

• Verify Manufacturing Consistency: The QP must confirm that the batch was manufactured according to the approved process described in the IMPD and the Master Batch Record. This includes a line-by-line review of the executed batch record [50].
• Review Quality Control Testing: All testing results for the finished product must be reviewed against the pre-defined specifications in the IMPD. Special attention must be paid to Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) such as identity, potency, purity, and sterility [51].
• Confirm GMP Compliance: The QP must ensure that all manufacturing and testing steps were performed in a GMP-compliant manner. This includes verification of aseptic processing conditions, personnel training records, and the calibration status of critical equipment [8] [6].
• Audit the Supply Chain: For cell therapies, the QP must ensure traceability and quality of all Substances of Human Origin (SoHOs). This involves reviewing donor screening records, and procurement and handling procedures against the new EU SoHO legislation [51].

The Certification and Release Process

Objective: To formally certify the batch for release based on a comprehensive review. Materials:

• Complete and verified PSF (from Protocol 4.1).
• QP certification statement template.
• Import documentation (if applicable).

Procedure:

• Final Reconciliation: Conduct a final reconciliation of all documentation to ensure no gaps or discrepancies exist.
• QP Certification Statement: Upon confirmation of full compliance, the QP signs the official batch certificate. This act is a formal declaration that the batch meets GMP standards and the requirements of the CTA [50] [6].
• Importation (if applicable): For batches manufactured outside the EU, importation is considered a final manufacturing step. The product must undergo quality control testing at an EU-approved site and be certified by an EU-based QP before release to the clinical site [51] [6].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Materials

The development and quality control of cell therapies rely on a suite of critical reagents and materials. The following table details essential items and their functions from a regulatory and development perspective.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Therapy Development

Reagent / Material	Function / Description	Regulatory & Quality Considerations
Cell Starting Materials	Somatic cells, stem cells, or tissues used to generate the therapy.	Must be procured and tested per EU SoHO legislation [51]. Donor eligibility, traceability, and testing for infectious diseases are critical.
Genome Editing Machinery	Vectors (viral, plasmid), mRNA, CRISPR/Cas9 components for genetic modification.	EMA guidelines define these as starting materials, requiring GMP-grade manufacturing, not research grade [51].
Critical Raw Materials	Cell culture media, cytokines, growth factors, transfection reagents.	By Phase 3, processes must use GMP-compliant, validated materials. Research-grade materials are not acceptable for commercial supply [51].
Orthogonal Assay Reagents	Kits and components for assays based on different scientific principles (e.g., qPCR and NGS for vector genome integrity).	Used to build confidence in Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs). FDA and EMA encourage orthogonal methods for attributes like identity, potency, and purity [51].
Reference Standards	Characterized materials used to calibrate equipment and validate analytical methods.	European Pharmacopoeia reference standards from EDQM are the benchmark for quality control testing in the EU [21].

Successfully navigating the batch certification process for cell therapy products in the EU requires a deep and proactive understanding of a heterogeneous and evolving regulatory environment. The foundational elements remain strict adherence to GMP principles, the central role of the Qualified Person, and the compilation of comprehensive and accurate product documentation. For ATMPs, this is further specialized by guidelines in EudraLex Volume 4, Part IV, and the requirement to manage novel starting materials under frameworks like the SoHO legislation.

Researchers and developers must integrate regulatory planning into the earliest stages of product design. Engaging with regulatory bodies like the CAT for classification and leveraging available support, such as fee reductions for SMEs, can de-risk the development pathway [9]. Furthermore, anticipating future changes, such as the increasing use of AI in manufacturing and the importance of orthogonal analytical methods, will position developers for success. By systematically addressing these country-specific requirements and regulatory heterogeneities, scientists can ensure that their innovative cell therapies meet the stringent standards required for clinical research and, ultimately, for delivering new treatments to patients.

Streamlining Logistics for Autologous Products with Short Shelf Lives

For autologous advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) in the European Union, where the batch is the patient itself, streamlining logistics is not merely an operational improvement but a fundamental component of regulatory compliance and patient safety. The journey of these therapies—from patient cell collection through manufacturing and back to the same patient—creates a closed-loop supply chain with extreme sensitivity to time and environmental conditions [52]. This process, often called the "vein-to-vein" timeline, must be meticulously managed to preserve product viability, particularly for products with shelf lives measured in hours or days [52].

Within the EU, this logistical chain is governed by a stringent regulatory framework. Each batch of finished product must be certified by a Qualified Person (QP) before release for supply in the EU, confirming compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and the Marketing Authorization [20]. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has established specific GMP guidelines for ATMPs, adapting standard requirements to the unique characteristics of these products [9]. Furthermore, the logistics for autologous therapies must maintain an unbroken Chain of Identity (COI) and Chain of Custody (COC), ensuring the product is derived from and returned to the correct individual, with documentation of every handling step [53] [54]. This application note details protocols designed to navigate these complex requirements while minimizing vein-to-vein time.

Regulatory Framework and QP Certification

The batch certification process for autologous cell therapies in the EU is anchored by the Qualified Person (QP), who has a legal duty to certify that each batch has been manufactured and tested in accordance with EU regulations and its marketing authorization [20]. The QP must ascertain the GMP status of every manufacturer in the supply chain, which is typically done through on-site audits [20].

Key Regulatory Considerations for Logistics

• GMP for ATMPs: The European Commission has published a set of GMP guidelines specific to ATMPs, which address novel and complex manufacturing scenarios [9].
• Substances of Human Origin (SoHO): Utilizing patient cells requires compliance with relevant SoHO legislation concerning procurement, donation, and testing [9].
• Borderless Application: While EU legislation is harmonized, individual member states may have specific requirements or interpretations, creating local hurdles that must be navigated [20].

Autologous Logistics Workflow: A Vein-to-Vein Protocol

The entire logistical operation for an autologous product, from cell collection to product administration, must be a validated and seamless process. The following workflow and detailed protocols are designed to ensure product integrity, patient safety, and regulatory compliance.

Figure 1: End-to-End Workflow for Autologous Cell Therapy Logistics. This vein-to-vein process highlights critical control points where Chain of Identity must be verified and environmental conditions monitored.

Phase 1: Patient Material Collection & Initial Processing Protocol

Objective: To collect patient starting material under controlled conditions with unambiguous patient identification and initiate stabilization for transport.

Materials:

• Apheresis kit with anticoagulant
• Primary collection container (sterile, single-use)
• Temperature-controlled transport container
• Patient-specific labels with at least two unique identifiers
• Chain of Identity documentation

Procedure:

• Patient Verification: Confirm patient identity using two unique identifiers (e.g., name and date of birth) before apheresis procedure.
• Aseptic Collection: Perform apheresis according to clinical standard operating procedures (SOPs), ensuring maintenance of sterility.
• Initial Labeling: Immediately label primary container with patient-specific labels. Include:
  • Patient identifiers
  • Date and time of collection
  • Initials of collecting professional
• Primary Packaging: Transfer material to transport container with appropriate temperature maintenance:
  • For fresh shipments: Use validated coolers with phase change materials maintaining 2-8°C or 15-25°C (controlled room temperature) as qualified [53].
  • For cryopreserved shipments: Use controlled-rate freezer to gradually cool material before transfer to dry shipper.
• Documentation Initiation: Complete first section of Chain of Identity and Chain of Custody documents.

Phase 2: Transport to Manufacturing Facility Protocol

Objective: To maintain product integrity and Chain of Identity during transit to manufacturing facility while monitoring and documenting environmental conditions.

Materials:

• Validated shipping system (primary, secondary, and tertiary packaging)
• Temperature monitoring device with data logging capability
• Tamper-evident seals
• Shock and orientation indicators
• Emergency response kit

Procedure:

• Shipping System Assembly:
  • Place primary container in secondary packaging with appropriate thermal buffer (e.g., gel packs, phase change material).
  • Secure in tertiary packaging designed for mechanical protection.
  • Activate and place temperature monitor in secondary packaging.
  • Apply tamper-evident seals.

• Pre-Shipment Verification:

  • Confirm recipient manufacturing facility address and contact information.
  • Verify courier is qualified for biological material transport.
  • Ensure all required documentation is included.

• Transport Execution:

  • Utilize real-time tracking to monitor shipment location.
  • Establish 24/7 monitoring capability for temperature alerts.
  • Maintain communication between clinical site, courier, and manufacturing facility.

• Contingency Planning:

  • Pre-qualify alternate shipping routes.
  • Establish emergency procedures for unexpected delays.
  • Implement winter weather and natural disaster protocols.

Table 1: Transport Condition Specifications for Autologous Starting Materials

Material Type	Temperature Range	Maximum Transit Time	Primary Packaging Considerations
Apheresis Product (Fresh)	15-25°C (Controlled Room Temp) or 2-8°C (Refrigerated) [53]	< 48 hours [53]	Gas-permeable container for cell viability
Apheresis Product (Frozen)	≤ -150°C (Cryogenic) [52]	Indefinite (if temperature maintained)	Cryogenic bag, controlled-rate freezing
Bone Marrow Aspirate	15-25°C (Controlled Room Temp) [53]	< 24 hours [53]	Anticoagulant treatment, volume considerations

Phase 3: Manufacturing & Return Preparation Protocol

Objective: To manufacture the autologous product while maintaining Chain of Identity and prepare the finished product for return transport under appropriate storage conditions.

Materials:

• Cryopreservation solution (e.g., DMSO-based cryoprotectant)
• Cryogenic storage bags or vials
• Validated cryogenic shipping container (dry shipper)
• Temperature monitoring device rated for cryogenic temperatures
• Final product labels

Procedure:

• Receipt and Verification:
  • Inspect shipment integrity upon arrival.
  • Download and review temperature data.
  • Verify Chain of Identity matches manufacturing order.
  • Document any deviations or exceptions.

• Manufacturing Process:

  • Execute manufacturing according to approved batch record.
  • Maintain segregated processing for each patient batch.
  • Perform in-process testing as defined in specifications.

• Final Product Packaging:

  • For cryopreserved products: Use controlled-rate freezing to gradually cool product to cryogenic temperatures [52].
  • Transfer to cryogenic storage bag/vial with patient-specific labeling.
  • Place in validated dry shipper pre-conditioned with liquid nitrogen.
  • Include temperature monitor in shipment.

• QP Certification and Release:

  • QP certifies batch after verifying compliance with GMP and Marketing Authorization [20].
  • Confirm all manufacturing steps were performed according to established procedures.
  • Verify all quality control testing meets specifications.
  • Ensure Chain of Identity has been maintained throughout.

Phase 4: Final Transport & Administration Protocol

Objective: To deliver the finished autologous product to the clinical site while maintaining cryogenic conditions and ultimately administer to the correct patient.

Materials:

• Liquid nitrogen dry shipper (validated for required hold time)
• Personal protective equipment for cryogenic handling
• Thawing equipment (if required)
• Final administration supplies

Procedure:

• Return Transport:
  • Schedule transport to coordinate with patient readiness.
  • Use qualified courier with expertise in cryogenic transport.
  • Provide clinical site with advanced shipping notification.
  • Monitor shipment in real-time with intervention protocols for delays.

• Clinical Site Receipt:

  • Verify product identity upon receipt against patient identification.
  • Immediately transfer to validated cryogenic storage if not administered immediately.
  • Download and review temperature data for any excursions.
  • Document receipt in Chain of Identity/Custody documentation.

• Product Administration:

  • Perform final patient verification before administration.
  • Thaw product according to manufacturer specifications if cryopreserved.
  • Administer product within validated stability window.
  • Document administration completion in patient medical record.

Validation and Critical Control Points

Shipping Validation Protocol

Objective: To qualify shipping systems and lanes to demonstrate maintenance of required temperature ranges throughout transit.

Methodology:

• Thermal Mapping: Place temperature monitors at multiple locations within the shipping system to identify hot/cold spots.
• Route Qualification: Perform three consecutive successful mock shipments using each qualified route.
• Seasonal Variation: Account for seasonal temperature variations in validation strategy.
• Failure Mode Testing: Expose shipping system to anticipated extreme conditions.

Table 2: Key Analytical Methods for Product Quality and Safety

Test Category	Specific Methods	Application in Autologous Products
Identity Testing	Flow cytometry, Genomic assays (PCR) [54]	Verification of patient-specific markers, confirmation of genetic modification
Sterility Testing	Microbial culture (14-day), Rapid gram staining [54]	Detection of bacterial/fungal contamination introduced during handling
Potency Assays	Cell-based functional assays, Cytokine release, Cytolytic capacity [54]	Measurement of biological activity specific to the therapeutic mechanism
Viability Assessment	Flow cytometry with viability dyes, Cell counting	Determination of percentage of live cells post-thaw
Purity Testing	Residual host protein/DNA analysis, Endotoxin testing [54]	Detection of process-related impurities

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Critical Materials for Autologous Therapy Logistics

Material/Reagent	Function	Critical Quality Attributes
Cryopreservation Media	Protect cells during freezing and thawing processes	DMSO concentration, serum-free formulation, pre-screened for compatibility
Temperature Monitoring Devices	Track and document temperature conditions during transit	Data logging capability, alarm functions, cryogenic temperature rating
Validated Shipping Containers	Maintain required temperature range during transport	Hold time validation, mechanical durability, appropriate size
Cell Culture Media & Supplements	Support cell growth and maintenance during manufacturing	cGMP-grade, endotoxin testing, performance qualification
Vector/Modification Reagents	Genetically modify patient cells (for gene-modified therapies)	Appropriate titer/potency, purity, absence of replication-competent virus

Streamlining logistics for autologous products with short shelf lives requires an integrated approach that encompasses regulatory compliance, robust process design, and meticulous execution. The protocols outlined in this application note provide a framework for maintaining product quality and patient safety throughout the vein-to-vein journey. As the field of autologous therapies continues to evolve, further standardization and technological innovation in logistics will be essential to expanding patient access to these transformative medicines. Successful implementation demands cross-functional collaboration between clinical, manufacturing, and logistics teams, all operating within the EU's sophisticated regulatory framework for advanced therapies.

Optimizing Labeling for Small Packages and Multi-Language Requirements

Within the European Union, the batch certification of cell therapy products represents a critical juncture in ensuring patient safety and regulatory compliance. This process is governed by a complex framework of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) regulations, detailed in EudraLex Volume 4, which stipulates the principles and guidelines for manufacturing investigational medicinal products [8]. For Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) like cell therapies, the labeling operation is not merely an administrative task but an integral part of the quality system. It must guarantee traceability, provide essential safety information, and ensure correct handling and administration, all while navigating the linguistic diversity of the EEA. This document outlines optimized protocols and application notes for implementing robust labeling processes that meet these stringent requirements, with a particular focus on the challenges posed by small primary container labels and multi-language packaging.

Regulatory Framework and Key Considerations

The regulatory landscape for labeling cell therapy products in the EU is multifaceted, encompassing general GMP rules and specific guidance for novel therapies. A thorough understanding of this framework is the foundation for any optimized labeling process.

Table 1: Core EU Regulatory Documents for Cell Therapy Labeling

Document / Guideline	Relevance to Labeling and Batch Certification
EudraLex Vol. 4, Annex 13 [8]	Details GMP for investigational medicinal products, including specific requirements for label content, randomization codes, and blinding.
EudraLex Vol. 4, Annex 16 [8]	Governs certification by a Qualified Person (QP) and batch release, directly impacting the legal release of labeled products.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1569 [8]	Specifies principles and guidelines for GMP for investigational medicinal products for human use.
EMA Pre-authorisation Guidance [55]	Provides critical information on the requirements for Marketing Authorisation Applications, including product information and multi-language requirements.
MHRA Point of Care Guidance [56]	Offers a modern framework for labeling products manufactured decntrally, which is highly relevant for patient-specific cell therapies.

Critical Labeling Challenges for Cell Therapies

• Limited Space on Primary Containers: Small vials or syringes used for cell therapies present a significant challenge, necessitating optimized font sizes, abbreviations, and potentially two-stage labeling processes (primary container label plus outer packaging).
• Multi-language Requirements: A single batch may be destined for multiple EEA countries. Strategies include using multi-language package leaflets, fold-out labels, or relying on the outer packaging for full linguistic information while the immediate container uses standardized symbols [55].
• Traceability and Unique Patient Identifiers: As autologous products, each batch is for a single patient. Labels must incorporate unique patient and product identifiers to prevent mix-ups, a core concern for the QP during batch certification [56].
• Decentralized Manufacturing: New guidance from the MHRA on Point of Care (POC) manufacturing acknowledges scenarios where immediate administration may exempt certain labeling requirements, though pre-labeling is still encouraged [56].

Experimental Protocols for Labeling Process Validation

Validating the labeling process is essential to demonstrate it can consistently produce accurate and legible labels under real-world conditions.

Protocol: Adhesion and Durability Testing

Objective: To verify that printed labels remain affixed and leg throughout storage, transport, and handling, including exposure to low temperatures (cryogenic storage) and condensation.

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation: Apply labels to filled primary containers (vials, bags) and outer cartons using the standard procedure. Prepare a minimum of 30 samples for statistical significance.
• Conditioning: Subject samples to three conditioning arms:
  • Arm A (Low Temperature): Store at -196°C (liquid nitrogen vapor phase) for 24 hours, then thaw to room temperature. Repeat for 5 cycles.
  • Arm B (Condensation): Transfer samples from a -80°C environment to a room temperature, high-humidity chamber (>80% RH) and monitor for 2 hours.
  • Arm C (Abrasion): Using a standardized abrasion tester (e.g., Sutherland Ink Rub Tester), apply a controlled force (2 lbs) with a standard fabric for 100 cycles.
• Evaluation: After conditioning, inspect labels for:
  • Adhesion: Use a standardized tape test (e.g., ASTM D3359) to assess peel-off.
  • Legibility: Visually inspect for smudging, fading, or any loss of clarity using a 3-point scale (1: No loss, 2: Slight loss, 3: Unreadable).
  • Integrity: Check for curling, tearing, or delamination.

Table 2: Acceptance Criteria for Adhesion and Durability Testing

Test Condition	Acceptance Criterion (Adhesion)	Acceptance Criterion (Legibility)
Low Temperature Cycling	≥90% of label area remains adhered; no edge lifting.	All text and barcodes remain perfectly legible (Score 1).
Condensation Exposure	100% of label area remains adhered.	All text and barcodes remain perfectly legible (Score 1).
Abrasion Resistance	≥95% of label area remains adhered.	All critical text (Patient ID, Product Name) remains legible (Score ≤2).

Protocol: Barcode and Readability Verification

Objective: To ensure 1D and 2D barcodes on labels can be reliably scanned by standard clinical and logistics equipment throughout the supply chain.

Methodology:

• Sample Generation: Generate labels with barcodes containing typical data (e.g., GTIN, Batch Number, Patient ID). Intentionally create samples with minor print defects (low ink, slight smudging) to define failure margins.
• Scanner Setup: Use a range of commonly available barcode scanners (laser, linear imager, area imager) with settings calibrated to standard clinical warehouse and ward environments.
• Testing Protocol: For each barcode on a sample, perform 100 scan attempts from different angles and distances. Record the success rate and the time-to-first-scan.
• Data Analysis: Calculate the scan success rate for each barcode type. A successful scan is defined as the correct and complete transfer of data on the first attempt.

Acceptance Criterion: A minimum scan rate of 99.5% across all valid samples is required for process approval.

Implementation of an Optimized Labeling Workflow

An optimized, QP-ready labeling process for cell therapies integrates regulatory requirements, risk management, and practical execution. The following workflow diagram and subsequent explanation detail this process.

Diagram 1: Optimized labeling workflow for QP batch release.

Workflow Breakdown

• Input of Approved Text: The process begins with the regulatory-approved, multi-language text for the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), label, and package leaflet [55]. This is a controlled input to prevent errors.
• Hybrid Label Production:
  • Design & Pre-Print: Static, multi-language information is pre-printed on outer cartons to enhance legibility and efficiency. This avoids cluttering the small primary label.
  • On-Demand Print: Variable data unique to the batch and patient (e.g., Patient Identifier, Batch Number, Expiry Date) is printed on-demand using validated software and printers. This is critical for autologous therapies [56].
• Independent Verification: A two-person verification check is performed against the QP's batch documentation. This is a critical step to ensure accuracy before labels are applied and is a key data point for the QP's certification decision under Annex 16 [8].
• Application and Final Check: Labels are applied, followed by a final verification for content accuracy, legibility, and correct adhesion on the packaging.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions for Labeling Operations

The following materials and solutions are essential for developing, validating, and executing a GMP-compliant labeling process for cell therapy products.

Table 3: Essential Materials for Labeling Process Development

Item	Function & Importance
Cryo-resistant Label Stock	Specialty labels with adhesives engineered to remain affixed and legible after exposure to extreme temperatures (e.g., -196°C) and resist condensation upon thawing.
Validated Label Design Software	Software (e.g., specialized modules in ERP/LES) that is validated to ensure it reliably produces labels conforming to approved templates and correctly prints variable data.
Thermal Transfer Printers & Ribbons	Provides high-quality, durable prints for barcodes and text. The choice of resin-based ribbons is often necessary for chemical and abrasion resistance.
Barcode Verification Hardware/Software	Validated scanner systems and software grades used to quantitatively assess barcode quality against standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 15415), not just functional scanning.
Standardized Test Materials	Mock-up primary containers (vials, bags) and outer cartons used for process validation and operator training under realistic conditions.

Optimizing the labeling process for cell therapy products within the EU's regulatory environment is a strategic imperative that directly supports the integrity of batch certification. By implementing a validated, hybrid labeling system that leverages pre-printed multi-language outer packaging and robust on-demand printing of variable data, sponsors can effectively address the dual challenges of space constraints and linguistic diversity. Adherence to the protocols for adhesion, legibility, and barcode performance, combined with a rigorous, verified workflow, provides the documented evidence required by the Qualified Person to certify the batch. This holistic approach ensures that these vital therapies are not only manufactured to the highest quality standards but are also accurately identified and safely administered to patients across the EEA.

Navigating Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) Classifications

Within the European Union, the batch certification process for cell therapy products is fundamentally shaped by their classification as Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). The regulatory framework distinguishes between different types of genetic modifications, which directly determines the applicable good manufacturing practice (GMP) requirements and batch release procedures. For advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), which include many cell therapies, this classification triggers specific obligations under Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EU) 2019/6 for veterinary medicinal products [8]. Understanding these classifications is paramount for researchers and drug development professionals to ensure regulatory compliance while advancing therapeutic innovations.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) provides specific GMP guidelines for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products in Part IV of EudraLex Volume 4 [8]. A recent concept paper proposes revisions to these guidelines to better align with technological advancements, with the consultation period open until July 8, 2025 [3]. These evolving standards emphasize the critical importance of precise GMO classification throughout the product development lifecycle, from research through commercial batch certification.

Current EU Regulatory Framework and Classification Systems

Established GMO Definitions and Categories

The EU regulatory framework for GMOs in medicinal products operates under a structured classification system that significantly impacts manufacturing requirements. The foundational legislation includes:

• Directive 2001/83/EC for human medicinal products
• Regulation (EU) 2019/6 for veterinary medicinal products
• Commission Implementing Regulations (EU) 2025/2091 and 2025/2154 for veterinary medicinal GMP requirements applicable from July 16, 2026 [8]

The GMP guidelines outlined in EudraLex Volume 4 apply uniform standards to both human and veterinary medicinal products until July 15, 2026, after which specific veterinary regulations take effect [8]. This transitional period requires careful planning for cell therapy products falling under veterinary applications.

Emerging Framework for New Genomic Techniques (NGTs)

The European Commission has proposed a new categorization system specifically for plants obtained through New Genomic Techniques, which may inform future approaches to cell therapy classifications:

Table: Proposed NGT Plant Categories in the EU

Category	Definition	Regulatory Requirements
Category 1 NGT	Equivalent to conventional plants (<20 genetic modifications); could occur naturally	Exempt from GMO regulations; no labeling required [57]
Category 2 NGT	All other NGT plants not meeting Category 1 criteria	Subject to current GMO legislation; risk assessment and labeling required [57]

This proposed two-tier system reflects a shift toward risk-based classification that considers the nature and extent of genetic modifications rather than applying a uniform regulatory approach to all GMOs. For cell therapy products, this evolving framework suggests future potential for differentiated regulatory pathways based on the specific genetic modification techniques employed.

GMP Requirements for GMO-Derived Cell Therapies

Pharmaceutical Quality System Requirements

Cell therapy products classified as GMOs must implement a comprehensive Pharmaceutical Quality System (PQS) as defined in Chapter 1 of EudraLex Volume 4 [8]. The PQS must encompass:

• Quality Risk Management following ICH Q9 principles
• Documentation Control ensuring traceability of all genetic modifications
• Change Management procedures for any modifications to manufacturing processes
• Outsourced Activities oversight for contracted GMO-related operations

The EMA's proposed revisions to Part IV GMP guidelines for ATMPs emphasize integration of ICH Q9 (Quality Risk Management) and ICH Q10 (Pharmaceutical Quality System) concepts, promoting a systematic approach to quality risk management throughout the product lifecycle [3].

Facility and Environmental Controls

Manufacturing facilities for GMO-classified cell therapies must adhere to stringent containment requirements based on the specific classification of the genetically modified cells. Key requirements include:

• Cleanroom Classification appropriate for the product's sterility and containment needs
• Barrier Systems such as isolators and Restricted Access Barrier Systems (RABS)
• Biosafety Cabinets for manual manipulations of individualized ATMP batches [3]
• Environmental Monitoring programs designed for GMO containment

The proposed GMP revisions for ATMPs provide updated expectations for cleanroom classifications and barrier systems, while maintaining provisions for biosafety cabinets to accommodate the manual manipulations often required for individualized ATMP batches [3].

Documentation and Traceability

Complete documentation is essential for GMO-classified cell therapies to ensure batch certification and regulatory compliance:

Table: Essential Documentation for GMO Cell Therapy Batch Certification

Document Type	Content Requirements	GMP Reference
Batch Records	Complete genealogy of cell line, including all genetic modifications	Chapter 4, EudraLex Vol. 4 [8]
Quality Control Records	Testing results for identity, purity, and potency of genetically modified cells	Chapter 6, EudraLex Vol. 4 [8]
Certificate of Analysis	Qualified Person certification for batch release	Annex 16, EudraLex Vol. 4 [8]
Stability Data	Evidence of genetic stability throughout shelf life	Annex 15, EudraLex Vol. 4 [8]

Experimental Protocols for GMO Classification Determination

Protocol 1: Genetic Modification Characterization Workflow

Objective: To systematically characterize genetic modifications in cell therapy products for appropriate regulatory classification.

Materials and Reagents:

• Nucleic Acid Extraction Kits (e.g., QIAamp DNA Blood Mini Kit) - for isolation of genomic DNA
• PCR Master Mix - for amplification of specific genetic sequences
• Sanger Sequencing Reagents - for sequence verification
• Next-Generation Sequencing Platform - for comprehensive genomic analysis
• Restriction Enzymes - for analysis of specific modification sites

Methodology:

• Isolate genomic DNA from the engineered cell therapy product using standardized extraction protocols
• Amplify target sequences using PCR with primers specific to the introduced genetic elements
• Perform sequencing analysis to verify the precise genetic modifications and identify any unintended changes
• Analyze integration sites for viral vector-based modifications using specialized PCR techniques
• Confirm copy number of introduced genetic elements using digital PCR or qPCR
• Assess genetic stability through serial passage studies and analysis at multiple time points
• Document all findings in a comprehensive genetic modification characterization report

Quality Controls:

• Include appropriate positive and negative controls in all assays
• Validate all molecular biology methods according to ICH Q2(R1) guidelines
• Establish acceptance criteria for genetic modification parameters
• Implement data integrity controls for all electronic records

Protocol 2: Batch Certification Testing for GMO-Classified Cell Therapies

Objective: To perform quality control testing required for batch release of GMO-classified cell therapy products.

Materials and Reagents:

• Flow Cytometry Antibodies - for cell identity and purity assessment
• Cell Culture Media - for viability and potency assays
• qPCR Reagents - for detection of residual vector DNA and replication-competent viruses
• Sterility Testing Media - for bacterial and fungal culture
• Endotoxin Testing Kits - for bacterial endotoxin detection

Methodology:

• Perform identity testing using flow cytometry for surface markers or PCR for genetic markers
• Assess purity and potency through functional assays relevant to the mechanism of action
• Conduct safety testing including sterility, mycoplasma, and endotoxin testing
• Verify genetic identity through analysis of specific genetic modifications
• Quantity viable cell count and potency using validated analytical methods
• Test for replication-competent viruses if viral vectors were used in manufacturing
• Document all results in a batch-specific Certificate of Analysis

Acceptance Criteria:

• Meeting all specifications defined in Marketing Authorization
• Demonstration of consistent genetic modification profile
• Confirmation of absence of contaminants
• Verification of product potency and viability

Batch Certification Process Workflow

The following workflow diagrams the batch certification process for GMO-classified cell therapy products in the EU:

Batch Certification Workflow for GMO Cell Therapies

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table: Key Research Reagent Solutions for GMO Classification Studies

Reagent/Material	Function in GMO Classification	Application Examples
Next-Generation Sequencing Kits	Comprehensive genomic analysis to characterize genetic modifications	Identifying insertion sites, verifying intended modifications, detecting off-target effects
PCR and qPCR Reagents	Targeted amplification and quantification of specific genetic sequences	Copy number determination, vector sequence detection, stability monitoring
Flow Cytometry Antibodies	Cell surface and intracellular marker analysis	Identity testing, purity assessment, phenotypic characterization
Cell-Based Potency Assay Reagents	Functional assessment of therapeutic activity	Mechanism of action studies, batch-to-batch consistency, stability indicating
Nucleic Acid Extraction Kits	Isolation of high-quality DNA and RNA from cell products	Genetic modification analysis, identity testing, contaminant screening
Sterility Testing Media	Detection of bacterial and fungal contaminants	Batch release testing, environmental monitoring, facility control

Compliance Strategy and Future Regulatory Directions

Implementing a Proactive GMO Classification Strategy

For research and drug development professionals working with cell therapies, a proactive approach to GMO classification involves:

• Early Engagement with regulatory authorities to discuss classification questions
• Comprehensive Characterization of genetic modifications during early development
• Documentation Practices that maintain complete genetic modification histories
• Quality by Design approaches that incorporate classification requirements into process development

The European Commission's ongoing development of NGT regulations indicates a trend toward more nuanced classification systems that may eventually extend beyond plants to other organisms, including those used in cell therapies [57].

Adaptation to Technological Advancements

The EMA's proposed revisions to ATMP GMP guidelines acknowledge the emergence of new technologies in manufacturing, including:

• Automated Systems for reduced human intervention and improved consistency
• Closed Single-Use Systems for enhanced containment of GMO materials
• Rapid Microbiological Methods for faster batch release decisions
• Advanced Analytical Methods for comprehensive characterization of genetic modifications

These technological advancements present opportunities for improved control strategies for GMO-classified cell therapies while maintaining regulatory compliance.

Utilizing Third-Party Logistics and Manufacturing Partners

For cell therapy developers operating within the European Union, navigating the complex batch certification process is a critical requirement for both clinical trials and commercial distribution. The European regulatory framework classifies cell and gene therapies as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), subjecting them to stringent control [18]. A cornerstone of this framework is the requirement that every product batch, including those imported from non-EU countries, must be certified by a Qualified Person (QP) before it can be released for use within the EU [18]. This process ensures compliance with EU Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards, but introduces significant logistical and operational complexity. This document provides detailed application notes and experimental protocols for effectively utilizing Third-Party Logistics (3PL) providers and Contract Development and Manufacturing Organizations (CDMOs) to successfully navigate this mandatory certification pathway.

Regulatory Framework & Key Definitions

Core Regulatory Concepts

• Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs): The official EU classification for cell therapies, gene therapies, and tissue-engineered products [18].
• Qualified Person (QP): A licensed professional legally responsible for certifying that each batch of an ATMP meets EU GMP standards and the requirements of its marketing authorization before it is released for use [58] [18].
• QP Batch Certification: The formal, documented release process performed by the QP. For products manufactured outside the EU, this is a mandatory step for market entry [58].
• Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS): The single-entry point for all clinical trial applications in the EU, which enhances transparency and requires meticulous supply chain traceability [59].

The Impact of the Clinical Trial Regulation (CTR)

The EU's Clinical Trial Regulation (CTR), fully effective from January 2025, streamlines approvals but imposes stricter supply chain transparency. It allows for a single application for clinical trial authorization across up to 30 European countries, reducing redundant national applications [59]. This centralization, while efficient, demands that sponsors and their partners provide enhanced digital traceability and adapt to requirements like harmonized multi-language labeling, which directly impacts how 3PLs and CDMOs must manage product identity and chain of custody [59].

Quantitative Data Analysis of the CGT Logistics and Manufacturing Landscape

Effective partner selection and protocol design require an understanding of the market dynamics and costs involved. The following tables summarize key quantitative data.

Table 1: Market Size and Growth Projections for Cell and Gene Therapy (CGT) Logistics and Manufacturing

Market Segment	2024/2025 Market Size	2030/2035 Projected Market Size	Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR)	Key Growth Drivers
U.S. CGT 3PL Market [60]	US$2.61 Billion (2024)	US$5.88 Billion (2033)	9.46% (2025-2033)	Rising therapy adoption, specialized supply chain needs, expanding biopharma collaborations [60].
Global CGT Manufacturing Market [61]	US$32.11 Billion (2025)	US$403.54 Billion (2035)	28.8% (2025-2035)	Growing therapy pipeline, regulatory complexity, need for scalable production [61].
Global CGT Market [18]	US$15.5 Billion (2025)	US$34.3 Billion (2030)	17.3% (2025-2030)	Scientific advancement, potential to cure diseases by addressing root causes [18].

Table 2: Key Challenges and Mitigation Strategies in CGT Supply Chains

Challenge	Impact on Batch Certification	Mitigation Strategy via 3PL/CDMO Partners
High Cost of Specialized Logistics [60]	Increases overall cost of goods, impacting therapy affordability and commercial viability.	Leverage 3PL economies of scale; implement fit-for-purpose (not over-engineered) packaging solutions [60] [62].
Stringent EU GDP/GMP & QP Release [18]	Mandatory, yet can constrain logistical timelines and delay patient treatment.	Partner with providers offering EU QP services on-site and established regulatory expertise [58] [18].
Complex Cold Chain Requirements [60] [62]	Temperature excursions can breach Chain of Identity (COI) and compromise batch release.	Utilize IoT-enabled real-time tracking, cryogenic storage, and validated shipping systems [60] [62].
Limited Workforce Expertise [60]	Inadequate handling can cause deviations, leading to QP rejection of the batch.	Select partners with documented staff training programs specific to CGT handling nuances [60] [62].
Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) Classification [18]	Incorrect classification can halt shipments, causing fatal delays for time-sensitive therapies.	Work with logistics experts proficient in navigating IATA dangerous goods and GMO regulations for ATMPs [18].

Experimental Protocol: QP Batch Certification for an Imported Cell Therapy

This protocol outlines the step-by-step process for achieving successful QP batch release for an autologous cell therapy manufactured in the US and destined for a clinical trial patient in the EU.

Pre-Protocol Requirements and Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Therapy Logistics

Item	Function/Explanation in the Context of Logistics & Certification
Cryopreservation Media	Formulation must be GMP-grade and documented for QP review. Any changes may require a comparability assessment.
Cryogenic Shipper (Liquid Nitrogen Dry Vapor)	Validated to maintain temperature below -150°C for a defined duration. Its qualification data is part of the chain of compliance.
IoT Temperature & Location Logger	Provides continuous, real-time data critical for the QP's assessment of product integrity during transit. Data must be unbroken and accessible.
Chain of Identity (COI) Tracking System	A robust (often digital) system that maintains an immutable link between the patient and their specific product batch from vein-to-vein.
GMP-Compliant Primary Container (e.g., Cryobag)	The container must be certified for leachables and extractables at cryogenic temperatures. Its identity is integral to the COI.

Step-by-Step Certification and Logistics Workflow

Diagram Title: EU QP Batch Certification Workflow for Imported Cell Therapy

• Step 1: Pre-Shipment Documentation Review (Initiated Prior to Manufacturing)

  • Objective: To allow the QP at the designated EU CDMO (e.g., Minaris Regenerative Medicine in Germany) to perform a preliminary review of the batch's compliance status [58].
  • Methodology:
    • The US-based manufacturing CDMO sends an electronic copy of the following documents to the EU QP:
      • Batch Manufacturing Record
      • In-process and Quality Control testing results (e.g., potency, sterility, viability)
      • Certificate of Analysis (CoA)
      • Documentation of the cleanroom environmental monitoring during manufacturing
      • Shipping validation protocol for the selected container system
    • The QP identifies any potential compliance gaps that could prevent release.

• Step 2: Quarantine Shipment from US CDMO to EU CDMO

  • Objective: To physically transport the cryogenically preserved cell therapy product from the US manufacturing site to the EU CDMO's facility where the QP is located, while maintaining the product in a formal "quarantine" status [18].
  • Methodology:
    • The product is packaged by the US CDMO into a validated cryogenic shipper [62].
    • A minimum of four layers of packaging is used: primary product container (cryobag) within a protective sleeve, placed in a cryobox, then into a dry vapor shipper, and finally within a labeled outer cardboard box [62].
    • An IoT-enabled tracking device is activated and included within the secondary packaging to provide real-time location and temperature data [60] [62]. The data stream is made accessible to both the US and EU sites and the 3PL.
    • The shipment is clearly labeled as "QUARANTINED MATERIAL - NOT FOR HUMAN USE" and is accompanied by the full physical documentation package.

• Step 3: Receipt and Verification at EU CDMO

  • Objective: To confirm the integrity of the product upon arrival and verify the Chain of Identity (COI).
  • Methodology:
    • Upon receipt, the EU CDMO quality team immediately:
      • Inspects the external packaging for damage.
      • Downloads and reviews the temperature log from the IoT device to confirm no critical temperature excursions occurred.
      • Scans the product's unique identifier and reconciles it with the COI documentation.
    • The product is transferred to a designated quarantine storage unit (cryogenic tank) while the verification is completed. The storage unit is continuously monitored.

• Step 4: Final Product Testing and Storage (If Required)

  • Objective: To perform any final, time-sensitive quality control tests that could not be completed before shipment due to the product's limited shelf-life.
  • Methodology:
    • If specified in the trial protocol, a sample may be taken for rapid sterility testing or other release assays.
    • The product remains in quarantine storage until all test results are available and reviewed.

• Step 5: QP Certification and Batch Release

  • Objective: The final, legally binding certification of the batch by the QP.
  • Methodology:
    • The QP performs a final review of the complete and verified documentation package, including:
      • Full Batch Record
      • All QC test results (from US and any from the EU site)
      • Shipping data and temperature log
      • COI verification records
      • Verification that the product was manufactured in accordance with EU GMP standards [58].
    • Upon confirming full compliance, the QP signs the official batch certificate.
    • The status of the product in the inventory management system is officially changed from "Quarantine" to "Released".

• Step 6: Final Distribution to Clinical Site

  • Objective: To deliver the certified cell therapy product to the treating hospital for patient infusion.
  • Methodology:
    • The released product is transferred from the EU CDMO's storage to a validated transport container.
    • A specialized 3PL provider (e.g., World Courier, Cencora/ICS) manages the final leg of delivery, often using a dedicated courier [62] [18].
    • The clinical site confirms receipt and verifies the product identity and integrity immediately before administration.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Partner Selection Criteria

Selecting the right CDMO and 3PL partner is a critical strategic decision. The following criteria are non-negotiable for success in the EU environment:

• Proven EU QP Services: The CDMO must provide direct access to experienced QPs who are knowledgeable about the specific nuances of cell therapy products [58]. Confirm their track record of successful batch releases for ATMPs.
• Established Regulatory Expertise: Partners must demonstrate in-depth knowledge of the EU's evolving ATMP framework, including the CTR, CTIS, and national implementation differences [63] [59].
• Integrated Cold Chain Infrastructure: The 3PL must offer more than standard cold storage. Require evidence of cryogenic capabilities, IoT-enabled real-time monitoring, and validated shipping protocols for time-sensitive, high-value products [60] [62].
• Robust Chain of Identity (COI) Management: The partner must have a digitally integrated system for tracking the product from donor to patient, which is auditable and secure. This is fundamental for both patient safety and regulatory compliance.
• Geographic and Network Strategy: For therapies with very short shelf-lives (e.g., those using isotopes like Pb-212 with a 10.6-hour half-life), a decentralized manufacturing or regional hub model may be necessary [61] [64]. Evaluate partners based on their network's ability to support this paradigm.

Ensuring Compliance through Analytical Validation and Comparative Analysis

The validation of analytical procedures is a fundamental requirement for ensuring the quality, safety, and efficacy of cell therapy products. For batch certification of these advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) in the EU, adherence to the ICH Q2(R2) guideline is imperative [65]. This guideline provides a harmonized framework for validating analytical procedures used in the release and stability testing of commercial drug substances and products [65]. Within the context of cell therapy products, which are characterized by their living cell nature, complex manufacturing processes, and often autologous source material, robust analytical validation becomes particularly critical [66]. This document outlines application notes and protocols for implementing ICH Q2(R2) specifically for the batch certification process of cell therapy products in EU research and development.

Core Validation Parameters According to ICH Q2(R2)

ICH Q2(R2) defines the key validation characteristics that must be demonstrated for analytical procedures. The table below summarizes these parameters and their specific considerations for cell therapy products.

Table 1: Validation Parameters as per ICH Q2(R2) and their Application to Cell Therapy

Validation Parameter	Definition (from ICH Q2(R2))	Application to Cell Therapy Analytical Procedures	Typical Acceptance Criteria for Cell Therapies
Accuracy	The closeness of agreement between the value which is accepted as a conventional true value or an accepted reference value and the value found.	Critical for potency assays and cell counting. Assessed by spiking known quantities of a reference standard or using an alternative, validated method [66].	Recovery of 70-130% in early development; 80-120% for validated methods for complex assays like potency.
Precision (Repeatability, Intermediate Precision)	The closeness of agreement between a series of measurements obtained from multiple sampling of the same homogeneous sample under the prescribed conditions.	Essential for flow cytometry (e.g., % of CD34+ cells) and qPCR for vector copy number. Intermediate precision assesses impact of different analysts, days, and equipment [66].	RSD ≤ 20-25% for biological assays. Demonstrating intermediate precision is critical for transfer to QC labs.
Specificity	The ability to assess unequivocally the analyte in the presence of components which may be expected to be present.	Ability to distinguish the target cell population from impurities or residual components (e.g., reagents, non-viable cells) in a complex matrix [65] [66].	No interference from matrix components. Confirmed by testing relevant negative controls and process residuals.
Detection Limit (LOD)	The lowest amount of analyte in a sample which can be detected but not necessarily quantitated as an exact value.	Important for residual impurity testing (e.g., host cell DNA, cytokines) and detection of replication competent virus in viral vector lots.	Typically 3:1 Signal-to-Noise ratio, or determined from the analysis of samples with known concentrations of the analyte.
Quantitation Limit (LOQ)	The lowest amount of analyte in a sample which can be quantitatively determined with suitable precision and accuracy.	Applied to residual endotoxin testing and quantifying small sub-populations of cells or low-level impurities.	Typically 10:1 Signal-to-Noise ratio, with precision (RSD) ≤ 20% and accuracy of 80-120% at the LOQ.
Linearity	The ability of the procedure (within a given range) to obtain test results which are directly proportional to the concentration (amount) of analyte in the sample.	Demonstrated for cell counting methods and qPCR standard curves. The response must be linear across the expected range of the product specification [65].	Correlation coefficient (r) ≥ 0.98. Visual inspection of the plot for random scatter around the regression line.
Range	The interval between the upper and lower concentration (amounts) of analyte in the sample (including these concentrations) for which it has been demonstrated that the analytical procedure has a suitable level of precision, accuracy and linearity.	The range should encompass the specification limits and the expected variability of the process. For example, the range for viable cell count should cover the minimum and maximum doses [65].	Confirmed by demonstrating accuracy, precision, and linearity at the upper and lower limits of the specified range.
Robustness	A measure of the procedure's capacity to remain unaffected by small, but deliberate, variations in method parameters and provides an indication of its reliability during normal usage.	Evaluates impact of small changes in critical parameters (e.g., antibody incubation time in flow cytometry, annealing temperature in PCR, incubation temperature in cell-based assays) [66].	The method remains unaffected by small, deliberate variations. System suitability criteria are established based on robustness data.

Experimental Design and Protocols for Cell Therapy Validation

The validation strategy must be phase-appropriate, with the level of rigor increasing as the product progresses from early clinical trials to commercial marketing authorization [66]. By the time of batch certification for pivotal trials or market release, all non-compendial methods must be fully validated in accordance with ICH Q2(R2) [66].

Protocol 1: Validation of a Flow Cytometry Assay for Identity and Purity

Objective: To validate a multi-color flow cytometry panel for determining the identity (presence of target marker, e.g., CD19) and purity (percentage of target cells) in a final CAR-T cell product.

Materials:

• Research Reagent Solutions: See Table 3.
• Test samples: Final drug product aliquots.
• Control cells: Positive control (cell line expressing target antigen), Negative control (cell line not expressing target antigen), Isotype controls.
• Staining buffer, viability dye, fixation buffer.

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation: Aliquot a defined number of cells (e.g., 1x10^5) into staining tubes. Include unstained and single-stained controls for compensation.
• Viability Staining: Stain cells with a viability dye to exclude dead cells from the analysis.
• Surface Marker Staining: Incubate cells with pre-titrated antibody cocktails targeting the identity markers (e.g., CD3, CD19-CAR, CD8/CD4) and relevant isotype controls.
• Fixation: Wash cells and fix with a stabilizing buffer.
• Data Acquisition: Acquire data on a flow cytometer calibrated daily using calibration beads.
• Data Analysis: Analyze data using appropriate software. Gate on single, live, lymphocytes, then on the target cell population.

Validation Experiments:

• Specificity: Compare staining with specific antibodies versus isotype controls. Demonstrate the ability to distinguish the target population from other cell types.
• Accuracy: Spike recovery experiment. Spike known numbers of positive control cells into a negative cell matrix and assess recovery.
• Precision:
  • Repeatability: Analyze 6 replicates of the same drug product batch in a single run.
  • Intermediate Precision: Analyze the same batch on 3 different days, by two different analysts, using the same instrument.
• Linearity & Range: Prepare a dilution series of positive control cells in a negative cell matrix (e.g., from 1% to 90%) to demonstrate the assay is linear across the expected range of purity.
• Robustness: Deliberately vary key parameters like antibody incubation time (±5 minutes) and staining volume (±10%) to assess impact on the results.

Protocol 2: Validation of a Cell-Based Potency Assay

Objective: To validate a bioassay that measures the biological activity of a CAR-T cell product, such as its ability to kill target tumor cells, as a measure of potency.

Materials:

• Research Reagent Solutions: See Table 3.
• Effector cells: CAR-T drug product and non-transduced T-cells as a negative control.
• Target cells: Tumor cell line expressing the target antigen.
• Assay plates, co-culture media, detection reagent for cytotoxicity (e.g., LDH release, luciferase-based).

Methodology:

• Co-culture Setup: Plate target cells in a multi-well plate. Add effector cells at multiple Effector:Target (E:T) ratios. Include target cells alone (spontaneous control) and with lysis buffer (maximum control).
• Incubation: Incubate for a defined period (e.g., 4-24 hours) at 37°C, 5% CO2.
• Signal Detection: Measure cytotoxicity using the chosen detection system (e.g., measure LDH in supernatant or luminescence).
• Data Analysis: Calculate specific lysis. Use a reference standard to normalize results and report potency relative to the standard.

Validation Experiments:

• Accuracy: Assess the ability of the assay to distinguish between active CAR-T cells and non-transduced negative control T-cells.
• Precision: Perform repeatability and intermediate precision studies as in Protocol 1. Due to higher variability, acceptance criteria for precision (RSD) may be wider (e.g., ≤ 30%).
• Linearity & Range: Test a dilution series of the CAR-T cell product to demonstrate a dose-response curve. The validated range should cover the expected potency of test samples.
• Specificity: Confirm that the cytotoxic activity is dependent on the target antigen by including a tumor cell line that does not express the antigen.
• Robustness: Evaluate the impact of small changes in E:T ratio, co-culture duration, or cell plating density.

The following workflow diagram illustrates the overarching process for validating an analytical procedure from development to implementation in a cell therapy batch certification context.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The successful validation of analytical methods for cell therapies is dependent on the quality and consistency of critical reagents.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents for Cell Therapy Analytical Validation

Reagent / Material	Function in Analytical Procedures	Critical Quality Attributes for Validation
Reference Standard	Serves as the benchmark for assessing accuracy, precision, and potency of the product. Used to normalize assay results and control for inter-assay variability.	Well-characterized for identity, purity, and potency. Sourced from a qualified bank with established stability data.
Critical Antibodies	Used in flow cytometry (identity, purity) and immunoassays (e.g., cytokine detection). Essential for specificity.	Validated for specificity and cross-reactivity. Clone, conjugation, and vendor are established as part of the method.
Cell Lines	Used as positive/negative controls in potency assays (target cells) and as system suitability controls (e.g., for cytotoxicity assays).	Authenticated and free from mycoplasma. Maintained under controlled conditions with defined passage number ranges.
qPCR/ddPCR Reagents	Used for quantifying vector copy number (VCN), residual host cell DNA, and specific transgene expression. Critical for safety and identity.	Primer/probe specificity and efficiency must be documented. Master mixes from qualified vendors with low batch-to-batch variability.
Cell Culture Media	Supports cell-based assays (potency, viability). The matrix for many analytical procedures.	Serum-free and defined formulations are preferred. Must support consistent cell growth and function.
Viability & Apoptosis Dyes	Distinguishes live from dead cells in flow cytometry and other cell-based analyses. Critical for accurate cell counting and phenotyping.	Validated for the specific cell type. Must not interfere with other staining panels or cell function.

Regulatory Considerations for the EU Framework

For batch certification of cell therapy products in the EU, the analytical procedures and their validation data are a core component of the Marketing Authorization Application (MAA). The European Medicines Agency (EMA) adheres to ICH guidelines [65]. Furthermore, for patient-specific testing used for enrollment or monitoring, CLIA certification may be required for the testing laboratory, adding another layer of regulatory oversight to ensure the quality of patient results [67]. It is important to note that ICH has recently (July 2025) released comprehensive training materials for ICH Q2(R2) to ensure a harmonized global understanding and application, which researchers should consult for the most current interpretations [68].

The following diagram outlines the logical relationship and sequence of key experiments within a typical validation protocol for a critical cell therapy assay, such as a potency assay.

Phase-Appropriate Assay Qualification and Validation Strategies

For cell therapy products developed in the European Union, a phase-appropriate approach to assay validation continues to be a widely accepted and adopted strategy to support clinical development and ensure product quality [69]. This approach is critical for integrating analytical methods into the batch certification process, providing assurance that each batch meets rigorous standards for safety, identity, purity, quality, and potency before release. The analytical method life cycle is closely aligned with the product life cycle, ensuring that method development and validation activities correspond to the product's stage of clinical development and associated risks [69].

The European regulatory framework for advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) emphasizes that manufacturers must comply with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) principles outlined in EudraLex Volume 4 [8]. For batch certification, the Official Control Authority Batch Release (OCABR) procedure requires that batches of certain biological medicinal products undergo independent control testing in a Member State's Official Medicines Control Laboratory (OMCL) before being placed on the market [16]. This underscores the necessity for robust, validated analytical methods throughout product development.

Regulatory Framework and Guidelines

EU Regulatory Landscape

Cell therapy developers must navigate a complex regulatory framework consisting of multiple directives and guidelines. The foundational requirements for manufacturing are established in Commission Directive 2003/94/EC, which outlines the principles and guidelines of good manufacturing practice for medicinal products for human use [8]. For ATMPs specifically, the European Commission has published a set of GMP guidelines that adapt EU GMP requirements to the specific characteristics of these complex products [9].

The Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) provides specialized evaluation and assessment of ATMPs within the EU regulatory network. EMA offers various support mechanisms for developers, including scientific advice, qualification of novel methodologies, and financial incentives such as fee reductions for small and medium-sized enterprises [9] [70].

Key Guidelines for Assay Validation

Several regulatory guidelines inform the phase-appropriate approach to assay validation in the EU:

• ICH Q2(R2) on validation of analytical procedures provides the scientific principles for validation, which can be applied in a phase-appropriate manner during clinical development [69].
• ICH Q14 on analytical procedure development offers guidance on the design and development of analytical methods throughout their life cycle [69].
• USP <1220> covers the analytical procedure life cycle, complementing ICH guidelines [69].
• EMA guidelines specific to ATMPs address quality, non-clinical, and clinical requirements for investigational advanced therapy medicinal products in clinical trials [69].

Table 1: Key Regulatory Guidelines for Assay Validation of Cell Therapies in the EU

Guideline	Issuing Authority	Key Focus Areas	Relevance to Cell Therapies
ICH Q2(R2)	ICH	Validation of analytical procedures	Provides principles for phase-appropriate validation
ICH Q14	ICH	Analytical procedure development	Guidance on method design and life cycle management
USP <1220>	USP	Analytical procedure life cycle	Approach for monitoring method performance
GMP for ATMPs	European Commission	Good manufacturing practice specific to ATMPs	Adapted requirements for complex therapy manufacturing
Directive 2001/83/EC, Article 114	European Parliament	Official Control Authority Batch Release	Legal basis for batch testing of biological medicines

Phase-Appropriate Approach to Assay Validation

Analytical Method Life Cycle Management

The method life cycle begins during preclinical development with the definition of Analytical Target Profiles (ATP), which are prospective, technology-independent descriptions of the desired performance of an analytical procedure [69]. The ATP defines the required quality of the reportable value and serves as a basis for procedure qualification criteria.

Figure 1 below illustrates the relationship between the product development life cycle and the analytical method life cycle:

As shown in Figure 1, the Target Product Profile (TPP) informs the desired attributes of the therapeutic product, which then guides the identification of potential Critical Quality Attributes (pCQAs) during preclinical development [69]. These pCQAs inform the phase-appropriate analytical assay validation strategy.

Phase-Specific Validation Requirements

Phase 1 (Early Clinical Development)

For initial investigational new drug submissions for Phase 1 studies, validation of analytical procedures is usually not required; however, sponsors must demonstrate that test methods are appropriately controlled and based on scientifically sound principles [69]. The emphasis is on method qualification rather than full validation.

Key expectations for Phase 1:

• Demonstration that methods are fit for purpose
• Qualification of safety-related tests before clinical trials
• Use of compendial methods when appropriate
• Sufficient information on method suitability based on intended use

Phase 2-3 (Pivotal Trials)

As products move into pivotal trial phases, method validation studies ensure analytical data is fit for purpose and robust enough to meet performance criteria defined in the ATP [69]. The extent of validation increases with clinical phase.

Key expectations for Phase 2-3:

• Partial validation to cover identified CQAs
• Inclusion of potency assays among release tests
• Enhanced method robustness testing
• Demonstration of assay precision and accuracy

Marketing Authorization Application

Before commercialization, analytical methods must be fully validated in accordance with ICH Q2(R2) to support the marketing authorization application [69]. The validation data package should comprehensively demonstrate method reliability for all CQAs.

Key expectations for MAA:

• Complete validation per ICH Q2(R2)
• Method robustness data
• Stability-indicating properties
• Lifecycle management plan

Table 2: Phase-Appropriate Validation Requirements for Cell Therapy Assays

Validation Parameter	Phase 1	Phase 2	Phase 3	Commercial
Accuracy/Recovery	Limited assessment	Partial validation	Full for CQAs	Full validation
Precision	Limited data	Intermediate precision	Full for CQAs	Full validation
Specificity	Demonstration	Partial validation	Full for CQAs	Full validation
Linearity/Range	Limited assessment	Established for range	Verified for CQAs	Fully established
Robustness	Not required	Limited assessment	System suitability	Full evaluation
Forced Degradation	Not required	Not required	Preliminary	Comprehensive

Experimental Protocols for Critical Assays

Protocol 1: Potency Assay Development

Principle: Potency assays for cell therapies must reflect the main mechanism of action and support potency assurance of the product throughout clinical development [69] [71].

Materials and Reagents:

• Target cells (expressing relevant antigens)
• Effector cells (therapy product)
• Culture medium (appropriate for cell type)
• Detection reagents (antibodies, dyes)
• Cytokine detection assay (ELISA or multiplex)
• Flow cytometry reagents (if applicable)

Procedure:

• Cell Preparation: Prepare target and effector cells at appropriate viability (>85%) and concentration.
• Co-culture Setup: Establish effector-to-target ratios based on mechanism of action (typically 1:1 to 10:1).
• Incubation: Culture cells for predetermined time (typically 24-72 hours) at 37°C, 5% CO₂.
• Response Measurement:
  • For cytotoxic therapies: Measure target cell killing using viability dyes or caspase activation.
  • For immunomodulatory therapies: Quantify cytokine secretion (IFN-γ, IL-2, etc.) or surface marker expression.
• Data Analysis: Calculate potency relative to reference standard. Establish acceptance criteria based on historical data.

Validation Parameters:

• Accuracy: Spike/recovery experiments with known active and inactive samples
• Precision: Minimum of 6 replicates across multiple days and analysts
• Linearity: Dilution series of positive control covering specification range
• Specificity: Testing against unrelated cell types or in presence of inhibitors

Protocol 2: Vector Copy Number Analysis

Principle: Quantification of vector copy number is critical for genetically modified cell therapies to ensure consistent genetic modification and assess potential risks associated with insertional mutagenesis.

Materials and Reagents:

• Genomic DNA extraction kit
• DNA quantification system (fluorometric)
• qPCR reagents (probes or SYBR Green)
• Vector-specific primers and probes
• Reference gene primers and probes (e.g., RNase P)
• Standard curve templates (serial dilutions)
• qPCR instrument

Procedure:

• DNA Extraction: Isolate genomic DNA from cell therapy product (minimum of 1×10⁶ cells).
• DNA Quantification: Precisely measure DNA concentration using fluorometric method.
• Standard Curve Preparation: Create serial dilutions of template covering expected range (10-10⁶ copies).
• qPCR Setup: Prepare reactions in triplicate for both vector-specific and reference gene assays.
• Amplification: Run qPCR with optimized cycling conditions.
• Data Analysis:
  • Calculate vector copy number using standard curve method or ΔΔCt method.
  • Normalize to reference gene and cell number.
  • Apply acceptance criteria: R² >0.98, efficiency 90-110%.

Validation Parameters:

• Specificity: No amplification in negative controls (untransduced cells)
• Limit of Detection/Quantification: Dilution series to determine lowest reliable copy number
• Precision: Inter and intra-assay variability assessment
• Linearity: Across expected specification range (typically 0.1-10 copies/cell)

Batch Certification and OCABR Process

The Official Control Authority Batch Release (OCABR) procedure is a regulatory requirement for certain biological medicines in the EU, including some cell therapy products [16]. The process involves:

• Early Engagement: Manufacturers should contact OMCLs at least one year before marketing authorization application submission [16].
• Sample Submission: Marketing authorization holders submit batch samples and production/control protocols to an OMCL.
• Testing and Assessment: The OMCL performs examinations and tests in accordance with OCABR guidelines.
• Certificate Issuance: If results are satisfactory, the Competent Authority issues an "Official Control Authority Batch Release Certificate."
• Mutual Recognition: The certificate is recognized by all EU/EEA member states and partner countries with formal agreements.

Figure 2 illustrates the OCABR process workflow and its integration with the batch certification process:

For successful batch certification, manufacturers must ensure that their analytical methods are appropriately validated for the product's development stage and that method performance is sufficiently robust to meet OCABR requirements [16]. Early collaboration with OMCLs is strongly recommended to facilitate method alignment and understanding of testing expectations.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Therapy Assay Development

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function in Assay Development	Quality Considerations
Cell Culture Media	X-VIVO, TexMACS, StemSpan	Supports maintenance and function of cellular products	Serum-free formulation, GMP-grade, endotoxin testing
Flow Cytometry Reagents	Fluorochrome-conjugated antibodies, viability dyes, calibration beads	Phenotypic characterization and purity assessment	Validation for specific cell types, lot-to-lot consistency
Molecular Biology Kits	qPCR kits, DNA extraction kits, NGS library prep	Genetic modification analysis, identity testing	Sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility
Cytokine Detection Assays	ELISA kits, multiplex immunoassays, ELISpot kits	Potency assessment, functional characterization	Standard curve performance, dynamic range, specificity
Reference Standards	Characterized cell lines, quantification standards	Assay qualification and validation, system suitability	Stability, commutability, traceability
Microbiology Testing	Endotoxin detection, mycoplasma testing, sterility kits	Safety testing for adventitious agents	Compliance with pharmacopoeial methods, validation

Implementing a phase-appropriate approach to assay qualification and validation is essential for the successful development and batch certification of cell therapy products in the EU. This strategy ensures that analytical methods evolve with the product's clinical advancement while maintaining scientific rigor and regulatory compliance. The batch certification process requires special consideration of OCABR requirements, with early engagement with OMCLs being crucial for smooth regulatory transition from development to commercial marketing.

As regulatory frameworks continue to evolve, particularly with the ongoing development of a new Annex to ICH Q5E specifically addressing CGT comparability challenges, developers should maintain flexibility in their validation strategies while ensuring patient safety and product quality remain paramount [72]. The integration of phase-appropriate principles with thorough understanding of EU-specific requirements provides a solid foundation for successful cell therapy development and commercialization.

For researchers and developers of cell therapies, navigating the divergent batch release requirements between the U.S. and European Union presents a significant challenge. The batch certification process is a critical quality control step that ensures each product lot meets predefined specifications for safety, identity, purity, and potency before administration to patients. While the United States regulates these products as Cell and Gene Therapies (CGTs) under FDA's CBER/OTP, the European Union classifies them as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) overseen by the EMA's Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) [51] [73]. This application note provides a detailed comparative analysis of US CGT and EU ATMP batch release requirements within the context of EU research on batch certification processes for cell therapy products.

Understanding these regulatory distinctions is crucial for designing compliant batch release protocols, especially for sponsors pursuing global development pathways. The Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC) requirements governing batch release exhibit both convergence and divergence across several key areas, including testing standards, personnel responsibilities, and handling of non-conforming batches [72] [73]. This document synthesizes these requirements into actionable protocols and comparative tables to support researchers and drug development professionals in establishing robust, compliant batch release systems.

Comparative Analysis: Key Regulatory Differences

Regulatory Frameworks and Oversight

The regulatory architectures governing batch release for advanced therapies differ substantially between the US and EU. In the United States, CGTs fall under the oversight of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), specifically the Office of Therapeutic Products (OTP), which applies regulations primarily under the Public Health Service Act and Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations [51] [74]. The FDA maintains direct authority over batch release decisions without mandatory external certification for each batch, though manufacturers must establish and adhere to rigorous internal release specifications [74].

In the European Union, ATMPs are regulated under Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007, with scientific evaluation provided by EMA's Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) [73]. A fundamental distinction in the EU system is the mandatory involvement of a Qualified Person (QP) who must certify that each batch of an ATMP meets requirements of the marketing authorization and Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards before it can be released for use [51] [9]. This QP system creates a structured batch release process with personal legal responsibility that has no direct equivalent in the US regulatory framework.

Batch Testing and Specifications

Both regulatory authorities require comprehensive testing of critical quality attributes, but with notable differences in specific testing requirements and acceptance criteria as detailed in Table 1.

Table 1: Comparative Batch Release Testing Requirements

Test Category	US CGT Requirements	EU ATMP Requirements
Sterility	Sterility testing per USP <71> or equivalent method [72]	Sterility testing per European Pharmacopoeia methods [9]
Mycoplasma	Detection by culture and/or indicator cell culture methods [72]	Testing per European Pharmacopoeia 2.6.7 [9]
Potency	Validated functional potency assay reflecting mechanism of action; phase-appropriate validation expected [51] [72]	Functional assay required; infectivity and transgene expression may suffice in early phase [72]
Identity	Multiple orthogonal methods to uniquely identify product [51]	Combination of phenotypic and genetic markers [73]
Purity	Measurement of product-related impurities and process-related contaminants [72]	Similar impurity profile requirements with specific focus on residual vectors [72]
Viral Safety	Extensive testing for replication-competent virus (RCV) required for both vector and final cell product [72]	RCV testing on viral vector starting material; generally not required on final genetically modified cells [72]
Viability	Viable cell count and percentage viability [73]	Viable cell count and percentage viability with defined acceptance criteria [73]
Vector Copy Number	qPCR or digital PCR with defined acceptance criteria [51]	qPCR with defined acceptance criteria [72]

For potency testing, the FDA expects a validated functional assay that reflects the product's biological mechanism of action, with phase-appropriate validation beginning early in development [51] [72]. The EMA may accept less functional assays in early phases, with infectivity and transgene expression potentially sufficing for viral vectors [72]. Regarding viral safety, a significant divergence exists in testing for replication-competent virus (RCV), where the FDA requires testing on both the viral vector and the final genetically modified cell product, while the EMA typically only requires RCV testing on the viral vector starting material [72].

Personnel and Release Authority

The personnel responsible for batch release and their specific qualifications represent another area of regulatory divergence, as summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Personnel Requirements for Batch Release

Aspect	US CGT Requirements	EU ATMP Requirements
Release Authority	Manufacturer's designated quality unit with demonstrated independence [74]	Qualified Person (QP) with personal legal responsibility [51] [9]
Qualifications	Appropriate education, training, and experience in biological quality control [74]	Formally qualified per Directive 2001/83/EC requirements; named on manufacturing license [9]
Responsibilities	Review of all production and testing records; authorization of release decision [74]	Certification that each batch complies with MA and GMP; maintenance of QP register [51] [9]
Legal Status	Corporate responsibility under cGMP regulations [74]	Personal legal responsibility under EU law [9]

The EU's Qualified Person system establishes a professional with personal legal responsibility for certifying that each batch meets the marketing authorization and GMP requirements before release [51] [9]. This system has no direct equivalent in the US framework, where batch release authority rests with the manufacturer's quality unit operating under corporate responsibility models [74].

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Comprehensive Batch Release Testing Workflow

This protocol outlines the core testing procedures required for batch release of cell therapy products, integrating requirements from both US and EU regulatory frameworks.

Materials and Reagents:

• Test article (drug substance/drug product)
• Appropriate cell culture media and supplements
• Sterility testing media (FTM/SCDM)
• Mycoplasma testing kit (culture-based or PCR-based)
• Flow cytometry antibodies for identity/purity
• Cell viability reagents (e.g., trypan blue, fluorescent dyes)
• Potency assay-specific reagents (dependent on mechanism of action)
• qPCR/dPCR reagents for vector copy number analysis
• Endotoxin testing reagents (LAL)

Procedure:

• Sample Selection and Preparation:
  • Aseptically remove representative samples from the final drug product container.
  • Allocate aliquots for each required test, ensuring sample integrity throughout.

• Sterility Testing:

  • Perform sterility testing according to either USP <71> (US) or European Pharmacopoeia 2.6.1 (EU) methods.
  • Incubate samples for 14 days in appropriate media at specified temperatures.
  • Document any microbial growth daily.

• Mycoplasma Testing:

  • Conduct testing using either culture methods (28-day incubation) or indicator cell culture methods with DNA staining.
  • For EU compliance, follow European Pharmacopoeia 2.6.7 requirements.
  • Include appropriate positive and negative controls.

• Identity Testing:

  • Perform flow cytometric analysis with at least two cell surface markers specific to the cell product.
  • Alternatively, use genetic fingerprinting methods for unique identification.
  • Ensure methodology can distinguish target cell population from others.

• Potency Assay:

  • Execute potency assay reflecting biological mechanism of action.
  • For genetically modified products, include transgene expression quantification.
  • For immunomodulatory products, include cytokine secretion or target cell killing assays.
  • Include reference standard and appropriate controls in each assay run.

• Viability Testing:

  • Determine viable cell count and percentage viability using automated cell counter with dye exclusion.
  • Perform in duplicate with acceptable precision between replicates.

• Purity and Impurity Analysis:

  • Quantify product-specific impurities (e.g., empty capsids for viral vectors).
  • Measure process-related impurities (residual reagents, serum proteins).
  • Use appropriate analytical methods (HPLC, ELISA, mass spectrometry).

• Vector-Specific Analyses (where applicable):

  • Determine vector copy number per cell using qPCR or digital PCR.
  • For US products, perform replication-competent virus testing on both vector and final cell product.
  • For EU products, perform RCV testing on vector starting material.

• Endotoxin Testing:

  • Perform bacterial endotoxins test using LAL methodology.
  • Ensure compliance with specified endotoxin limits per dose.

• Data Review and Interpretation:

  • Compile all testing data for review by appropriate quality unit (US) or Qualified Person (EU).
  • Compare results against established acceptance criteria.
  • Document any out-of-specification results and investigate as required.

Protocol 2: Handling Out-of-Specification (OOS) Results

This protocol provides guidelines for managing batches with out-of-specification release test results, with specific considerations for US and EU regulatory expectations.

Materials:

• OOS investigation form
• Laboratory notebooks and raw data
• Retained samples (if available)
• Quality assurance documentation

Procedure:

• Initial Assessment and Reporting:
  • Immediately notify quality unit and relevant stakeholders upon OOS identification.
  • For EU ATMPs, report to the Qualified Person and relevant national competent authority (e.g., SÚKL for Czech Republic) within 48 hours of product delivery to the site [75].
  • Place batch on quality hold pending investigation.

• Laboratory Investigation Phase:

  • Review analytical method execution for potential technical errors.
  • Examine instrumentation performance and calibration status.
  • Assess reagent integrity and preparation.
  • Evaluate analyst qualification and training records.
  • Review raw data for anomalies or deviations.

• Manufacturing Process Investigation:

  • Review batch manufacturing records for deviations.
  • Assess environmental monitoring data for potential impact.
  • Evaluate raw material and starting material quality.
  • Review equipment maintenance and qualification status.

• Root Cause Analysis:

  • Determine whether OOS result represents laboratory error, manufacturing issue, or true product quality failure.
  • Document investigation findings comprehensively.
  • Implement appropriate corrective and preventive actions.

• EU-Specific OOS Administration Procedure:

  • For EU ATMPs, administration of OOS batches is permitted only in exceptional circumstances to prevent immediate significant hazard to the patient [75].
  • The treating physician must:
    • Request administration of the OOS batch in writing.
    • Perform a risk-benefit analysis considering patient-specific factors.
    • Inform the patient about benefits and risks, documenting this discussion.
    • Obtain patient consent for OOS product administration [75].
  • The manufacturer must document product acceptance confirmation by the treating physician.
  • For investigational ATMPs, the clinical trial protocol should pre-specify procedures for OOS batch administration and data evaluation [75].

• Regulatory Reporting:

  • For US CGTs, report OOS results and investigations in annual reports or as specified in application.
  • For EU ATMPs, submit OOS administration reports to relevant national competent authority (e.g., via zavady@sukl.gov.cz for Czech Republic) [75].
  • For centrally authorized ATMPs in EU, additionally report to EMA [75].

Visualization of Batch Release Processes

US CGT Batch Release Workflow

US CGT Release Pathway Diagram illustrating the simplified batch release workflow for US Cell and Gene Therapy products, highlighting the centralized quality unit review process without mandatory external certification.

EU ATMP Batch Release Workflow

EU ATMP Release Pathway Diagram illustrating the comprehensive batch release workflow for EU Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products, highlighting the critical Qualified Person certification step and alternative pathway for out-of-specification batches under exceptional circumstances.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Reagents for Batch Release Testing

Reagent/Material	Function	Specific Application
Trypan Blue Solution	Viability staining	Cell count and viability determination via dye exclusion
Flow Cytometry Antibodies	Cell surface marker detection	Identity, purity, and impurity analysis
LAL Reagent	Endotoxin detection	Bacterial endotoxin testing for pyrogens
Mycoplasma Testing Kit	Mycoplasma detection	Contamination screening per pharmacopeial methods
Sterility Testing Media	Microbial growth promotion	Sterility testing (FTM and SCDM)
qPCR/dPCR Reagents	Nucleic acid quantification	Vector copy number determination and identity testing
Cell Culture Media	Cell maintenance	Potency assay support and cell-based testing
Reference Standard	Assay calibration	Potency assay qualification and system suitability
Cryopreservation Media	Cell preservation	Sample retention and stability testing

The batch release requirements for US CGT and EU ATMP products share common scientific principles but differ significantly in regulatory implementation. The US framework employs a quality unit approach with corporate responsibility, while the EU system mandates Qualified Person certification with personal legal liability [51] [9] [74]. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for researchers and developers designing batch release protocols, particularly for global development programs.

Key differences extend to specific testing requirements, particularly in potency assay validation expectations and viral safety testing approaches [72]. Furthermore, the handling of out-of-specification results follows distinct pathways, with the EU providing specific, though restricted, provisions for OOS batch administration under exceptional circumstances [75]. As regulatory frameworks continue to evolve, particularly with recent EU initiatives including the SoHO legislation and point-of-care manufacturing provisions, researchers must maintain vigilance in monitoring regulatory updates that may impact batch release strategies [51] [21].

For cell therapy researchers operating within the EU framework, establishing robust relationships with Qualified Persons early in development and implementing comprehensive testing protocols that address both US and EU requirements will facilitate efficient batch release processes and support global market access strategies. The comparative insights and experimental protocols provided in this application note offer a foundation for developing compliant, scientifically sound batch release systems that can adapt to the evolving regulatory landscape for advanced therapies.

For developers of cell and gene therapies (CGTs), the definition and regulatory expectations for starting materials represent a critical divergence between European Union (EU) and United States (US) regulatory frameworks. The manufacturing of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) is highly complex, and early decisions regarding process and analytical development can significantly impact licensure and commercialization [72]. Understanding these differences is essential for designing global development programs, particularly within the broader context of batch certification for cell therapy products in the EU.

This Application Note delineates the distinct Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) requirements for viral vectors and other starting materials used in cell therapies, comparing the perspectives of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We provide actionable protocols and data presentation to aid researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals in navigating this challenging landscape.

Regulatory Framework Comparison

The core distinction lies in the regulatory definition of what constitutes a starting material. The EMA provides a specific definition, whereas the FDA employs a more risk-based approach without a formal regulatory definition for "starting materials" [72].

EU Regulatory Framework

In the EU, the overarching guidelines for medicinal products are compiled in EudraLex Volume 4, which details GMP requirements [8]. For Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), the European Commission has published a dedicated set of GMP guidelines that adapt the standard EU requirements to the specific characteristics of these products [9].

• Definition of Starting Materials: The EMA defines 'starting materials' as all substances that form part of the drug substance. For a genetically modified cell therapy, this explicitly includes the viral vectors used to modify the cells, as well as the gene editing components and the cells themselves [72]. Consequently, these vectors must be prepared in accordance with GMP principles.
• Role of the Qualified Person (QP): While regulatory inspections of viral vector manufacturing sites may be uncommon, the manufacturer of the final drug substance must ensure the quality of the starting material. This responsibility is formally vested in a Qualified Person (QP), who must certify that the starting materials have been manufactured in accordance with GMP [72].
• Official Controls and Batch Release: The Official Control Authority Batch Release (OCABR) procedure, coordinated by the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & HealthCare (EDQM), is a legal requirement for certain human biological medicinal products in the EU [16]. Applicants are strongly recommended to engage with an Official Medicines Control Laboratory (OMCL) at least one year before submitting a marketing authorization application to facilitate this process [16].

US Regulatory Framework

The FDA's approach is characterized by its focus on risk and criticality, without a formal definition for "starting materials."

• Critical Raw Materials: The FDA does not have a regulatory definition of starting materials. Instead, the term 'critical raw materials' is often used to encompass substances such as viral vectors and plasmid DNA. The FDA expects an enhanced material control approach, aligned with the risk of the material and the stage of development [72].
• Viral Vector Classification: The FDA classifies in vitro viral vectors used to modify cell therapy products as a drug substance. This contrasts with the EMA's view of them as starting materials and directly influences the level of GMP scrutiny applied [72].
• Oversight and Enforcement: Regulatory oversight is exercised by the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), specifically through its Office of Therapeutic Products (OTP). Compliance with GMP regulations (21 CFR 210 & 211) is mandated for commercial products, and the agency emphasizes a risk-based control strategy for all materials [76].

Table 1: Key Regulatory Definitions and GMP Application for Viral Vectors

Aspect	European Union (EMA)	United States (FDA)
Regulatory Definition	Defined as 'starting materials' (Directive 2001/83/EC) [72].	No formal regulatory definition; uses 'critical raw materials' [72].
GMP Application	Full GMP principles apply to starting materials [72] [9].	Risk-based GMP expectations; viral vectors are considered a drug substance [72].
Batch Certification	Official Control Authority Batch Release (OCABR) may apply; certification by a Qualified Person (QP) is required [16].	No equivalent to QP certification; compliance is demonstrated through BLA submission and pre-approval inspection [76].
Regulatory Guidance	EudraLex Volume 4, Part IV (GMP for ATMPs) [8] [9].	FDA CBER Guidance Documents; PACT program for CGTs [76].

Detailed Comparison of Key CMC Considerations

Beyond the definition of starting materials, several Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC) aspects demonstrate further divergence and convergence between the two regions.

Table 2: Comparison of Key CMC Requirements for Cell and Gene Therapies

CMC Consideration	FDA Position	EMA Position
Potency Testing for Viral Vectors	A validated functional potency assay is essential for pivotal studies [72].	Infectivity and transgene expression may be sufficient in early phases; functional assays become important later [72].
Donor Testing Requirements	Governed by 21 CFR 1271; testing expected in CLIA-accredited labs [72].	Governed by the EU Tissue and Cells Directives (EUTCD); handling and testing in licensed premises [72].
Replication Competent Virus (RCV) Testing	Requires testing on both the viral vector and the final cell-based drug product [72].	If absence is demonstrated on the viral vector, further RCV testing on the GM cells is not required [72].
Process Validation (PV) Batches	Number not specified; must be statistically adequate [72].	Generally, three consecutive batches, with some flexibility allowed [72].
Use of Platform Data in PV	Acceptable where similar manufacturing steps are used [72].	Acceptable where similar manufacturing steps are used [72].

Experimental Protocols for Compliance

This section outlines core experimental protocols designed to generate data that satisfies both EU and US regulatory expectations for starting materials.

Protocol 1: GMP-Compliant Viral Vector Characterization

Objective: To comprehensively characterize viral vectors for identity, purity, potency, and safety, supporting their use as a starting material/drug substance.

Materials:

• Research Reagent Solutions: See Table 3 for essential materials.
• Purified viral vector batch
• Appropriate cell line for transduction (e.g., HEK293)
• qPCR/RT-qPCR reagents
• SDS-PAGE or CE-SDS system
• ELISA kits for host cell proteins and residual DNA
• Endotoxin testing kit (LAL)
• Sterility and mycoplasma testing kits

Methodology:

• Determine Vector Genome Titer (Identity/Potency):
  • Digest the vector sample with DNase I to remove unencapsidated DNA.
  • Incubate with Proteinase K to disrupt the capsid and release the vector genome.
  • Quantify the genome copies using qPCR with primers specific to a conserved transgene region. Express as vector genomes per mL (vg/mL) [77].

• Determine Infectious Titer (Potency):

  • Serially dilute the vector sample and transduce permissive cells in a 96-well plate.
  • Quantify transduction events after 48-72 hours using a method appropriate for the transgene (e.g., flow cytometry for a fluorescent protein, ELISA for a secreted protein).
  • Calculate the titer as transducing units per mL (TU/mL). The ratio of vg:TU indicates vector functionality [77].

• Assess Empty/Full Capsid Ratio (Purity):

  • Analyze the vector sample using analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC) or capillary electrophoresis (CE).
  • AUC separates particles by density, allowing quantification of empty (low density) versus full (high density) capsids. A high percentage of full capsids is a critical quality attribute [76].

• Conduct Impurity Analysis (Purity/Safety):

  • Residual Host Cell Protein/DNA: Use commercially available ELISA kits specific to the producer cell line (e.g., HEK293) to quantify residual impurities.
  • Residual Plasmid DNA: Use qPCR to detect and quantify any residual transfection plasmid DNA.
  • Endotoxins: Perform a Limulus Amebocyte Lysate (LAL) test per USP/EP guidelines.
  • Sterility and Mycoplasma: Perform compendial sterility and mycoplasma tests as per EP 2.6.1/2.6.7 and FDA requirements.

Data Analysis: Compare all results against pre-defined, justified specification limits. The data package should demonstrate consistency across batches and support the vector's quality and safety profile.

Protocol 2: Demonstrating Process Comparability

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a manufacturing process change on the critical quality attributes (CQAs) of the viral vector and the final cell therapy product.

Methodology:

• Define the Change and Risk Assessment: Clearly document the manufacturing change. Perform a risk assessment to identify which CQAs of the vector and final product could potentially be impacted.
• Analytical Testing Strategy:
  • For the Viral Vector: Conduct a side-by-side analysis of pre-change and post-change vectors using the characterization methods from Protocol 1. Focus on CQAs identified in the risk assessment [72].
  • For the Final Cell Product: If the risk assessment indicates a potential impact, test the final cell product manufactured with the post-change vector. Key tests include:
    • Transduction Efficiency: Measure the percentage of cells expressing the transgene (e.g., by flow cytometry).
    • Vector Copy Number (VCN): Use qPCR to determine the average number of vector integrations per cell.
    • Transgene Expression: Quantify the level of functional transgene expression (e.g., by ELISA or a functional assay).
    • Phenotype and Potency: Ensure the critical potency-indicating functions of the cell product are unchanged.
• Stability Assessment: Initiate or compare stability studies for the cell product made with the post-change vector to ensure no adverse impact on shelf-life.

Data Analysis: The extent of testing is driven by a risk-based approach [72]. For early-phase development, a subset of data may suffice. For commercial or late-phase changes, a comprehensive side-by-side analysis demonstrating equivalence is required. The EMA provides specific attributes to evaluate when changing the manufacturing process for recombinant starting materials, including full vector sequencing and stability; the FDA guidance is less prescriptive but expects a thorough assessment [72].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Reagents for Viral Vector and Cell Therapy Characterization

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Key Considerations
GMP-grade Plasmids	Used in transient transfection for vector production.	High purity, low endotoxin, absence of replication-competent sequences. Synthetic DNA is an emerging alternative [78].
Producer Cell Lines	(e.g., HEK293, Packaging Cell Lines). Engineered cells for vector propagation.	Use of stable producer cell lines can improve consistency and reduce plasmid needs [78] [77].
Cell Culture Media	Serum-free, chemically defined media for cell growth and vector production.	Lot-to-lot consistency is critical for process robustness and yield [77].
qPCR/RT-qPCR Assays	Quantification of vector genome titer, VCN, and residual DNA.	Requires validated primers/probes and standard curves. Must be specific, accurate, and reproducible.
Flow Cytometry Antibodies	Analysis of transduction efficiency and cell phenotype.	Critical for confirming identity and potency of the final cell product.
ELISA Kits	Quantification of transgene expression and residual host cell proteins.	Kits must be qualified for the specific analyte in the relevant sample matrix.

Workflow and Regulatory Pathway Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the parallel regulatory pathways and key decision points for viral vectors as starting materials in the EU and US, culminating in the EU batch certification process.

Regulatory Pathways for Viral Vectors in the EU and US

Navigating the divergent EU and US expectations for GMP of viral vector starting materials is a fundamental challenge in global cell therapy development. The EU's formal definition and requirement for GMP application, overseen by a Qualified Person and potentially subject to Official Batch Release, stands in contrast to the FDA's risk-based "critical raw material" approach and classification of vectors as a drug substance.

Successful global development programs must integrate these differences into their CMC strategy from the earliest stages. This involves implementing robust, GMP-compliant characterization protocols for viral vectors, designing pre-emptive comparability studies, and engaging early with both EU and US regulators. A deep understanding of these requirements is indispensable for successfully navigating the batch certification process in the EU and bringing transformative cell therapies to patients worldwide.

Within the European Union, the batch certification process for cell therapy products, classified as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), demands rigorous analytical control to ensure patient safety and product efficacy [9]. Cell counting is a fundamental potency test, as the determined cell number often defines the product dose [79] [80]. Consequently, the validation of the cell counting method is not merely a technical formality but a critical regulatory requirement under EudraLex Volume 4, the EU's Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) guidelines [8] [81]. This application note details a practical case study, following ICH Q2(R1) principles and relevant pharmacopoeial standards, for validating an automated cell counting method to replace the traditional manual hemocytometer for human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) [81] [82]. The manual method, while described in the European Pharmacopoeia, is known to be operator-dependent and time-consuming, posing a significant risk to the standardization required for cGMP manufacturing [81] [83]. This protocol provides a template for researchers and drug development professionals to implement a precise, accurate, and validated counting method suitable for in-process controls and batch release within a cGMP environment.

Regulatory and Standards Framework

The validation of analytical methods for ATMPs must be conducted within a well-defined regulatory framework. The primary legal basis for GMP in the EU is established in Directive 2001/83/EC, with detailed guidelines provided in EudraLex - Volume 4 [8] [9]. For ATMPs, Part IV of EudraLex Volume 4 outlines GMP requirements specific to these complex products, adapting general principles to their unique characteristics [8]. Furthermore, the European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur.) provides the standard for the reference method, as detailed in chapter 2.7.29 (Cell Count) [81].

The International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) Q2(R1) guideline, "Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology," forms the cornerstone for the validation strategy, defining the key parameters that must be assessed [81] [79]. These include accuracy, precision, specificity, linearity, and range. In addition to ICH, the ISO 20391 standard provides specific guidance on experimental design and statistical analysis for cell counting methods, offering a framework to quantify method performance in the absence of a certified reference material [84] [83]. Adherence to these standards ensures that the validation study meets the expectations of regulatory bodies like the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and national competent authorities, such as the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA) in the cited case study [81].

Case Study: Validation of an Automated Cell Counter for hiPSCs

Aim and Prerequisites

The objective of this validation was to demonstrate that the automated NucleoCounter NC-100 system, a fluorescence imaging-based instrument, is a suitable and superior alternative to the manual Bürker hemocytometer for counting hiPSCs in a cGMP-compliant ATMP manufacturing process [81] [82]. Prior to the validation study, essential prerequisites were met:

• Instrument Qualification: The automated system underwent Installation Qualification (IQ) and Operational Qualification (OQ) in accordance with cGMP guidelines [81].
• Personnel: Analysts were qualified with appropriate training and experience relevant to the intended operations [81].
• Sample Preparation: Research-grade hiPSC batches (n=3) were expanded and harvested using a protocol translatable to clinical cGMP. Cells were dissociated into a single-cell suspension using accutase and resuspended in Dulbecco's Phosphate Buffered Saline (d-PBS) without Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺ for counting [81].

Experimental Protocol: Side-by-Side Comparison

The validation was performed as a direct comparison between the proposed automated method and the Ph. Eur. reference manual method.

Detailed Methodology:

• Manual Cell Count (Reference Method)

  • Instrument: Bürker hemocytometer under a light microscope (e.g., Nikon Eclipse 50i) with a 20X objective [81].
  • Staining: Not applied; viable cells were identified based on morphology alone.
  • Procedure: A 10 µL aliquot of cell suspension was loaded into each chamber of the hemocytometer. For each sample, two independent samplings were performed, and each sampling was counted in duplicate by two independent analysts.
  • Calculation: Cell concentration was calculated according to the Ph. Eur. method. Counts were only accepted if the calculated concentration fell within the range of 50,000 to 550,000 cells/mL [81].

• Automated Cell Count (Proposed Method)

  • Instrument: NucleoCounter NC-100 system [81].
  • Staining: Based on propidium iodide (PI) incorporation. For total cell count, 100 µL of cell suspension was mixed with 100 µL of lysis buffer and 100 µL of stabilizing buffer. For viable cell count, non-viable cells were analyzed without pretreatment.
  • Procedure: The sample cartridge was loaded into the instrument, and the proprietary software automatically calculated the cell concentration and viability.
  • Range: Cell counts were accepted within the instrument's specified range of 5,000 to 2,000,000 cells/mL [81].

Validation Parameters and Acceptance Criteria

The validation focused on assessing the following parameters, with key quantitative results summarized in Table 1.

• Specificity: The ability to unequivocally assess the analyte in the presence of potential interferents. d-PBS (the sample matrix) was analyzed to confirm it did not generate a false-positive cell count signal [81].
• Accuracy: The closeness of agreement between the value found by the automated method and the value accepted as a conventional true value (from the reference method). This was assessed by comparing the results from both methods across multiple samples and batches [81] [79].
• Precision:
  • Intra-operator precision (Repeatability): The precision under the same operating conditions over a short interval of time, expressed as %CV [79].
  • Inter-operator precision (Intermediate Precision): The precision between different analysts performing the analysis on different days [81].
• Linearity and Range: The ability of the method to obtain test results proportional to the concentration of cells within a specified range. This was demonstrated by testing serially diluted samples and evaluating the linearity of the response [81] [83].

Table 1: Summary of Validation Parameters and Results for Automated Cell Counting

Validation Parameter	Experimental Approach	Key Result	Acceptance Criterion Met?
Specificity	Analysis of d-PBS matrix (blank)	No interference from matrix [81]	Yes
Accuracy	Comparison vs. Bürker hemocytometer (reference method) across hiPSC batches (n=3)	High agreement with reference method [81] [82]	Yes
Precision (Intra-operator)	%CV from multiple replicates by a single analyst	Higher precision (lower %CV) than manual method [81]	Yes
Precision (Inter-operator)	%CV between two independent analysts	Higher precision (lower %CV) than manual method [81]	Yes
Linearity	Analysis of cell suspensions across a dilution series	Linear response across the instrument's range [81]	Yes
Range	5x10^3 to 2x10^6 cells/mL	Validated range for hiPSC counting [81]	Yes

The following workflow diagram illustrates the experimental path from sample preparation to the final validation conclusion.

Diagram 1: Experimental workflow for cell count method validation.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

The successful execution of this validation protocol relies on specific, high-quality reagents and materials. The following table details the key components used in the featured case study.

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Cell Count Validation

Item	Function / Role in Validation	Example from Case Study
Automated Cell Counter	Fluorescence-based instrument for automated, high-throughput cell counting and viability analysis. Reduces operator-dependent variability.	NucleoCounter NC-100 system [81]
Manual Hemocytometer	The reference method against which the new automated method is validated, as per European Pharmacopoeia.	Bürker hemocytometer [81]
Cell Dissociation Reagent	Generates a single-cell suspension from adherent cultures, which is critical for accurate and reproducible cell counting.	Accutase [81]
Cell Culture Media & Supplements	For the expansion and maintenance of the cell type under investigation (e.g., hiPSCs).	Complete TeSR-E8 medium [81]
Extracellular Matrix	Coats culture surfaces to support the growth of adherent cells like hiPSCs.	hESC-qualified Matrigel [81]
Buffer Solution	Used to wash and resuspend cell pellets for counting; must not interfere with the counting method.	d-PBS without Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺ [81]
Viability Staining Reagents	Dyes used to distinguish viable from non-viable cells. For the automated system, proprietary reagents including lysis buffer and stabilizing buffer are used.	Propidium Iodide (PI) via instrument-specific kits [81]

Data Analysis and Interpretation

A robust data analysis strategy is essential for interpreting validation results. The case study employed statistical analysis of average, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation (%CV) for precision [81] [79]. A lower %CV for the automated method compared to the manual method convincingly demonstrates superior precision. For linearity, the correlation coefficient (R²) and the slope of the line are critical indicators, with an ideal slope value close to 1 indicating a proportional response [79] [83].

The logic of assessing method suitability, particularly when dealing with complex samples like cells isolated with beads, can be guided by the following decision flowchart.

Diagram 2: A logic flow for selecting a suitable cell counting method based on sample type.

This case study demonstrates a comprehensive and successful validation of an automated cell counting method for hiPSCs, aligning with EU regulatory requirements for ATMP batch certification. The data generated proved that the automated NucleoCounter NC-100 system exhibited higher precision and faster analysis times compared to the conventional manual hemocytometer [81] [82]. By following the structured experimental protocol and validation framework outlined in this application note, scientists in cGMP facilities can effectively implement robust, fit-for-purpose cell counting methods. This ensures the reliability of a critical potency test, thereby supporting the consistent manufacturing of safe and efficacious cell therapy products for clinical use.

Conclusion

The batch certification process for cell therapies in the EU is a multifaceted journey that demands a deep understanding of a evolving regulatory landscape. Success hinges on a foundation of robust quality control, strategic planning for logistical and regulatory hurdles, and rigorous analytical validation. As the field advances, future directions will likely involve greater regulatory harmonization, the adoption of novel analytical methodologies, and continued collaboration between developers, contract organizations, and regulators. Mastering these elements is paramount for researchers and developers aiming to deliver safe, effective, and compliant advanced therapies to patients across Europe.

References

• 1. Advanced therapy medicinal products: Overview [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/advanced-therapy-medicinal-products-overview]
• 2. Current State‐Of‐Play of the EU Advanced Therapy ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12104850/]
• 3. EMA Proposes Revisions to GMP Guideline for ATMPs [https://www.gmp-compliance.org/gmp-news/ema-proposes-revisions-to-gmp-guideline-for-atmps]
• 4. Guidance on good manufacturing practice and good ... [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/research-development/compliance-research-development/good-manufacturing-practice/guidance-good-manufacturing-practice-good-distribution-practice-questions-answers]
• 5. The Role of Qualified Persons (QP) in Clinical Trials [https://www.patheon.com/us/en/insights-resources/blog/role-of-qualified-persons-in-clinical-trials.html]
• 6. Understanding QP Certification & Batch Release [https://dsinpharmatics.com/understanding-qp-certification-batch-release/]
• 7. A guide to QP certification and batch release [https://www.news-medical.net/whitepaper/20241202/A-guide-to-QP-certification-and-batch-release.aspx]
• 8. EudraLex - Volume 4 - Public Health - European Commission [https://health.ec.europa.eu/medicinal-products/eudralex/eudralex-volume-4_en]
• 9. Support for advanced-therapy developers [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/advanced-therapy-medicinal-products-overview/support-advanced-therapy-developers]
• 10. Guidelines relevant for advanced therapy medicinal products [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/advanced-therapy-medicinal-products-overview/guidelines-relevant-advanced-therapy-medicinal-products]
• 11. Regulatory Framework for Advanced Therapy Medicinal ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6728416/]
• 12. Good Manufacturing Practice for ATMPs [https://www.eurogct.org/research-pathways/manufacturing/good-manufacturing-practice-atmps]
• 13. Decentralized Manufacturing of Advanced Therapy ... [https://konexiobiotech.com/en/decentralized-manufacturing-of-advanced-therapy-medicinal-products/]
• 14. Regulations and guidelines governing stem cell based products [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3159216/]
• 15. EU GMP Annex 16: Certification by a Qualified Person and ... [https://www.gmp-compliance.org/guidelines/gmp-guideline/eu-gmp-annex-16-certification-by-a-qualified-person-and-batch-release]
• 16. Batch Release for Human Biologicals: vaccines, blood and ... [https://www.edqm.eu/en/omcl/batch-release-for-human-biologicals-vaccines-blood-and-plasma-derivatives]
• 17. Supply Chain Management in the Delivery of ATMPs ... [https://www.insights.bio/cell-and-gene-therapy-insights/journal/article/364/Supply-Chain-Management-in-the-Delivery-of-ATMPs-for-Trials-as-Licensed-Medicines]
• 18. Cell and gene therapy regulatory framework in Europe [https://www.worldcourier.com/insights/time-to-adapt-europes-evolving-cgt-regulatory-framework]
• 19. Batch Release Testing: A Geographical Driver For ... [https://www.biopharminternational.com/view/batch-release-testing-geographical-driver-outsourcing-europe]
• 20. United in Diversity: Six Tips for European Batch Release [https://www.propharmagroup.com/thought-leadership/united-in-diversity-six-tips-for-european-batch-release]
• 21. Regulatory Round-up - July 2025 - Cell and Gene Therapy [https://ct.catapult.org.uk/news/regulatory-round-up-july-2025]
• 22. ATMPs specific "Hospital exemption" pathway [https://www.eurogct.org/research-pathways/therapy-classification/atmps-applicable-regulatory-pathways/atmps-specific]
• 23. EU Regulatory Pathways for ATMPs: Standard, Accelerated ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6378853/]
• 24. Role of Hospital Exemption in Europe: position paper from ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-023-01962-0]
• 25. The hospital exemption pathway for non-industrially ... [https://www.ibanet.org/hospital-exemption-pathway-advanced-therapy]
• 26. Patient access to and ethical considerations of the application of the... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35545453/]
• 27. NGS Revolution for Cell and Gene Therapy Products [https://www.genedata.com/resources/learn/details/blog/ngs-revolution-for-establishing-cqas-of-cgt-products]
• 28. Interfacing data science with cell therapy manufacturing [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1465324924000999]
• 29. Nucleus Biologics Achieves EXCiPACT Certification for ... [https://www.sgs.com/en-us/news/2025/01/nucleus-biologics-achieves-excipact-certification-for-gmp-quality-cell-culture-media]
• 30. European Union [https://www.aabb.org/regulatory-and-advocacy/regulatory-affairs/regulatory-for-cellular-therapies/international-competent-authorities/european-union]
• 31. MSC Manufacturing for Academic Clinical Trials [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8227789/]
• 32. Harmonisation of quality control tests for academic ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-025-02637-8]
• 33. Newsroom - European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines... [https://www.edqm.eu/en/newslist]
• 34. Raw material considerations for CGT [https://www.news-medical.net/health/Raw-material-considerations-for-CGT.aspx]
• 35. From the Editors — Cell Therapy Regulation in 2025 [https://www.isctglobal.org/telegrafthub/blogs/isct-head-office1/2025/10/07/from-the-editors-cell-therapy-regulation-in-2025-a]
• 36. The clinical quality management system of advanced ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2329050125000804]
• 37. Cell therapy medicinal product regulatory framework in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3418507/]
• 38. Potency testing of cell and gene therapy products [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2023.1190016/full]
• 39. A method to validate viral copy-number assay involving a ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2329050125000786]
• 40. Analysis of the measurements used as potency tests for the 31 ... [https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-025-06253-4]
• 41. Validation Challenges for Advanced Therapies [https://www.bioprocessintl.com/cell-therapies/analytical-method-validation-challenges-for-advanced-therapies-using-gene-therapies-as-an-example]
• 42. Validation of a High-Sensitivity Assay for Detection of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10488325/]
• 43. Potency testing of cell and gene therapy products - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10196484/]
• 44. Development and data requirements of potency tests for cell-based therapy products and the relation to clinical efficacy - Scientific guideline | European Medicines Agency (EMA) [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/development-data-requirements-potency-tests-cell-based-therapy-products-relation-clinical-efficacy]
• 45. Meeting Regulatory Challenges for Cell-Based Therapies [https://www.bioprocessintl.com/cell-therapies/meeting-regulatory-challenges-for-cell-based-therapies]
• 46. Potency testing of cell-based immunotherapy medicinal ... [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/potency-testing-cell-based-immunotherapy-medicinal-products-treatment-cancer-scientific-guideline]
• 47. Accelerating Innovative Cell Therapy Development ... [https://elevate.bio/elevated-insights/accelerating-innovative-cell-therapy-development-through-phase-appropriate-potency-control/]
• 48. Strategies for Achieving Measurement Assurance for Cell ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4878336/]
• 49. Analytical considerations for cellular therapy manufacturing [https://www.insights.bio/cell-and-gene-therapy-insights/journal/article/448/Analytical-considerations-for-cellular-therapy-manufacturing]
• 50. Batch Certification for Investigational and Medicinal Products [https://www.sciencepharma.com/services/batch-certification-for-medicinal-products/]
• 51. Where the US and EU differ and overlap with CGTs/ATMPs [https://www.pharmalex.com/thought-leadership/blogs/qa-for-innovators-navigating-the-complex-regulatory-world-of-atmps-cgts/]
• 52. Delivering Curative Therapies: Autologous vs. Allogeneic ... [https://ispe.org/pharmaceutical-engineering/november-december-2023/delivering-curative-therapies-autologous-vs]
• 53. Autologous Therapy Logistics → Term [https://fashion.sustainability-directory.com/term/autologous-therapy-logistics/]
• 54. Cell and Gene Therapy Quality Control & Assurance [https://www.cellandgene.com/topic/cell-gene-therapy-qa-qc]
• 55. Pre-authorisation guidance [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/marketing-authorisation/pre-authorisation-guidance]
• 56. 7 New MHRA Guidances To Help You With Decentralized ... [https://www.cellandgene.com/doc/new-mhra-guidances-to-help-you-with-decentralized-manufacturing-for-cell-and-gene-therapies-0001]
• 57. April 2025 Update on Regulation of New Genomic ... [https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/250425-april-2025-update-on-regulation]
• 58. QP Batch Certification - Minaris Regenerative Medicine [https://www.rm.minaris.com/en/services/qp-certification]
• 59. Navigating new EU regulations in the clinical supply chain [https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/sponsored/navigating-new-eu-regulations-in-the-clinical-supply-chain/]
• 60. United State Cell and Gene Therapy Third-Party Logistics ... [https://finance.yahoo.com/news/united-state-cell-gene-therapy-120500619.html]
• 61. Contract Manufacturing Outsourcing Trends For Advanced ... [https://www.outsourcedpharma.com/doc/contract-manufacturing-outsourcing-trends-for-advanced-therapies-in-and-beyond-0001]
• 62. 3PL providers are gearing up for the cell and gene therapy ... [https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/sponsored/how-3pl-providers-are-gearing-up-for-the-wave-of-cell-and-gene-therapies/]
• 63. Biologics CDMO Europe 2025 [https://www.imapac.com/events/cdmo-europe-2025]
• 64. 放射性治疗药物崛起：应对供应链的复杂性 [https://www.lek.com/zh-hant/insights/hea/global/ei/radiotherapeutics-rise-addressing-supply-chain-complexity]
• 65. ICH Q2(R2) Validation of analytical procedures [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/ich-q2r2-validation-analytical-procedures-scientific-guideline]
• 66. Cell Therapy Manufacturing: Testing, Validation & ... [https://www.allucent.com/resources/blog/cell-therapy-manufacturing]
• 67. CLIA Requirements for Gene & Cell Therapy Programs [https://www.bioagilytix.com/blog/clia-requirements-for-gene-and-cell-therapy-programs/]
• 68. ICH publishes Training Materials on Q2(R2) and Q14 [https://www.gmp-compliance.org/gmp-news/ich-publishes-training-materials-on-q2r2-and-q14]
• 69. A Phase-Appropriate Approach For Assay Validation In ... [https://www.cellandgene.com/doc/a-phase-appropriate-approach-for-assay-validation-in-cell-gene-therapies-0001]
• 70. Opinions and letters of support on the qualification of novel ... [https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/research-development/scientific-advice-protocol-assistance/opinions-letters-support-qualification-novel-methodologies-medicine-development]
• 71. Cell Therapy CMC and Manufacturing - 2025 Archive [https://www.bioprocessingeurope.com/25/cell-therapy-manufacturing]
• 72. Manufacturing and control strategies for Cell and Gene ... [https://www.parexel.com/insights/blog/manufacturing-and-control-strategies-for-cell-and-gene-therapy-products-navigating-eu-and-us-regulatory-requirements]
• 73. Manufacturing & Controls for Advanced Therapy Medical ... [https://www.eurogct.org/pl/node/1297]
• 74. FDA vs. EMA: Navigating Divergent Regulatory ... [https://cromospharma.com/fda-vs-ema-navigating-divergent-regulatory-expectations-for-cell-and-gene-therapies-what-biopharma-companies-need-to-know/]
• 75. Questions and Answers on the Use of Advanced Therapy ... [https://sukl.gov.cz/en/en-reg-kh-doplnujici-informace/questions-and-answers-on-the-use-of-advanced-therapy-medicinal-products-with-out-of-specification-release-test-results-2/]
• 76. BLA Filing Process for Gene Therapy Products: 2025 Guide [https://insights.forgebiologics.com/bla-filing-process-for-gene-therapy-products-2025-guide]
• 77. Viral Vector Manufacturing in Pharmaceutical Development [https://pharmasource.global/content/guides/category-guide/viral-vector-manufacturing-in-pharmaceutical-development-a-comprehensive-guide/]
• 78. Transformative Advances in Viral Vector Manufacturing [https://www.pharmasalmanac.com/articles/transformative-advances-in-viral-vector-manufacturing-unlocking-commercial-scalability-consistency-and-cost-effectiveness]
• 79. Validation of analytical methods in GMP: the disposable Fast ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3502295/]
• 80. Design and Validate a GMP Cell Based Assay [https://www.marinbio.com/design-and-validate-a-gmp-cell-based-assay/]
• 81. Validation of an automated cell counting method for cGMP ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8851089/]
• 82. Validation of an automated cell counting method for cGMP ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215017X22000091]
• 83. Evaluating the quality of a cell counting measurement ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1465324917306734]
• 84. Assessing the suitability of cell counting methods during ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10438949/]