Medutest result on a Zhuhai orforglipron lot lands 3.8 points below the supplier’s figure

Two laboratories analysing vials from the same orforglipron lot have returned figures 3.8 percentage points apart. Medutest reported 96.6%; PeptideMeter reported a lower number on a shallower gradient with a tighter integration threshold. Both results are defensible and the difference is entirely methodological, which is the point of publishing them together.

Reported figures across the set were: highest 96.6%, lowest 95.1%, median close to the midpoint of the two. Every report in the set stated a detection wavelength, and 12 of them stated an integration threshold. The Journal has asked the laboratory to publish thresholds on all reports as a matter of routine.

Reported figures across the set were: highest 96.6%, lowest 95.1%, median close to the midpoint of the two. Every report in the set stated a detection wavelength, and 12 of them stated an integration threshold. The Journal has asked the laboratory to publish thresholds on all reports as a matter of routine.

Batch variance rather than vendor quality is the recurring finding of this programme. Across the 12 determinations the Journal has commissioned to date, within-vendor spread has been wider than between-vendor spread for two thirds of the companies tracked, which is an argument against rating any supplier on a single number.

"Content is the number that matters if you are doing arithmetic with a vial, and content is the number nobody sells," said Alastair Renshaw, pharmaceutical supply-chain consultant. "Purity is what you can afford. Content is what you need."

GGPeps’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.