Independent analysis puts a TFC semaglutide lot at 99.0%, against 96.3% on the certificate
The result is unremarkable. What the report omits is not.
TheCompound Journal
Reporting on incretins, compounding & the peptide supply chain
Testing Dispatch
The supplier has not disputed the finding. It has not explained the gap either.
A peptide content determination commissioned by the Journal on a 10 mg dulaglutide vial from WXT has returned 94% of the labelled mass. Chromatographic purity on the same vial was above 95.8%. The two numbers measure different things and only one of them was on the certificate.
Content by elemental nitrogen determination returned 94% of the labelled nominal mass, which on a 10 mg vial corresponds to roughly 14.82 mg of peptide rather than the labelled figure. The remainder is accounted for by counter-ion, residual water and residual solvent, none of which is visible chromatographically.
The wider context is that material sold for research use carries no regulatory release specification in any jurisdiction the Journal has examined. A certificate is a commercial document, not a compliance one, and its content is whatever the issuer chooses to put on it. That is the gap independent testing fills, and it fills it imperfectly.
Alastair Renshaw, pharmaceutical supply-chain consultant, said the gap was predictable from the methods alone. "You can reconstruct almost the whole difference from the integration threshold. What you cannot reconstruct is why anyone thinks a number without a threshold is comparable to a number with one."
WXT’s dossier has been updated with this determination and with the date of the request for comment. The dossier’s "what we could not verify" box records the questions still outstanding.
The result is unremarkable. What the report omits is not.
None of what a checkable identity statement requires is commercially sensitive, and all of it is known to whoever produced the document.
A reminder that a purity figure is the output of a method, and that methods differ.
The Journal submitted the sample and paid for the analysis. The vendor was told in advance.
What would make a difference is not a regulator. It is three lines on a certificate, all of which are already known to whoever wrote it.
The Journal submitted the sample and paid for the analysis. The vendor was told in advance.