🍪 The GLP Lounge uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsCOA & Analytical TestingEndotoxin testing methods — what worked for you? Page 2

Endotoxin testing methods — what worked for you?

Dr.KarenChen Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 4:22 AM 15 replies 838 viewsPage 2 of 3
kate.chem
VIP Member
3,890
17,654
Dec 2023
California
Apr 28, 2026 at 1:56 AM#6
Dr.KarenChen said:
Inter-laboratory variation comes from real methodological differences, not sloppiness: which reference standard was used and how it was itself…

Reconstituted peptide stability data for certificates of analysis: I had Janoshik test my reconstituted vial at day 1, day 14, and day 28 stored in the refrigerator.

Day 1: 100.7% purity
Day 14: 99.1% purity
Day 28: 99.5% purity

Minimal degradation over 28 days when properly refrigerated. This confirms the standard 28-day beyond-use date is appropriate. Beyond 28 days, I'd reconstitute a fresh vial to be safe.

3 23steve_okc, dave_SLC, FDA_TrackerJim
Reply Quote Save Share Report
hannah_MT
New Member
23
89
Feb 2026
Bozeman, MT
Apr 28, 2026 at 10:30 AM#7

One thing that is still open after pat_auckland’s answer:

Why two laboratories report different purity for the same batch, and which number to believe?

Last edited: Apr 28, 2026 at 1:30 PM
2 22MounjBrad, nick_newbie
Reply Quote Save Share Report
BariatricNurseD
Senior Member
1,678
7,234
Feb 2024
Dallas, TX
Online
Apr 28, 2026 at 7:04 PM#8
kate.chem said:
Reconstituted peptide stability data for certificates of analysis: I had Janoshik test my reconstituted vial at day 1, day 14, and day 28 stored in…

My HPLC chromatogram analysis for certificates of analysis — I sent my batch to Janoshik and here's what the results showed:

Main peak retention time: 16.7 minutes (consistent with semaglutide reference standard)
Peak purity: 98.8%
Related substances: 0.4% (single impurity at 10.2 minutes — likely a synthesis intermediate)
Mass spec: m/z 4113.5 (matches expected molecular weight)

This is a clean result. The mass spec confirmation is particularly important — it proves the molecule is actually semaglutide and not a substitution.

1 21josh_phd_bmore
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards
Dr.KarenChen
VIP Member
4,210
24,567
Nov 2023
San Francisco, CA
Apr 29, 2026 at 3:38 AM#9

Closing the loop on my own question.

Purity and content being different measurements was the piece I was missing. The vial was overfilled and pure, which is a very different problem from the one I thought I had.

50 20mike.trainer_LA, sarah_nash92, FitDadDave and 47 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.PathRoch
Member
456
2,123
Jun 2024
Rochester, MN
Apr 30, 2026 at 8:44 PM#10
BariatricNurseD said:
My HPLC chromatogram analysis for certificates of analysis — I sent my batch to Janoshik and here's what the results showed: Main peak retention time:…

Agreed, and mass spec answers a question purity does not: identity. High purity tells you one thing dominates the chromatogram, not that it is the molecule you ordered. A mass within about a dalton of expected is the identity check.

26 24Dr.MetabolicMD, RetaRick_CA, JenPlateau and 23 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

HPLC vs UPLC for peptide purity — method comparison study18 replies
Mass spectrometry for peptide identity verification — ESI-MS guide7 replies
Endotoxin testing methods — LAL vs recombinant Factor C17 replies
Red flags on COAs — how to spot a fake certificate5 replies
USP reference standards for peptide verification — sourcing guide3 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register