| Literature DB >> 30640042 |
Chensheng Li1, Sitaram Bhavaraju1, Marie-Pier Thibeault2, Jeremy Melanson2, Andreas Blomgren3, Torgny Rundlöf3, Eric Kilpatrick4, Carolyn J Swann5, Timothy Rudd5, Yves Aubin6, Kevin Grant7, Margaret Butt7, WaiKei Shum7, Tursun Kerim7, William Sherwin7, Yukari Nakagawa8, Sergi Pavón9, Silvia Arrastia9, Tim Weel10, Arunima Pola1, Dinesh Chalasani1, Steven Walfish1, Fouad Atouf11.
Abstract
USP's peptide reference standards content is typically determined using an HPLC assay against an external standard for which the purity was determined by a mass balance approach. To explore the use of other analytical methods, the USP Biologics Department conducted a multi-laboratory collaborative study. The study determined the inter-laboratory variability for peptide quantitation using the following methods: HPLC assay, quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance (qNMR) spectroscopy, or amino acid analysis (AAA). The three methods were compared with regard to their suitability for quantitation of the nonapeptide oxytocin. In this study, the HPLC assay method using the same peptide bulk material as the standard showed the lowest inter-lab variability. The coefficient of variation (%CV) was calculated without counting the uncertainty associated with the purity assignment of the standard with mass balance. The proton qNMR method is a direct measurement of the peptide against an internal standard, which is not difficult to perform under common laboratory conditions. Because of the simpler operation and shorter analytical time, qNMR as a primary method for peptide reference standard value assignment deserves further exploration.Entities:
Keywords: Amino acid analysis (AAA); HPLC; NMR; Peptide; Quantification
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30640042 PMCID: PMC6507411 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2018.12.028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pharm Biomed Anal ISSN: 0731-7085 Impact factor: 3.935