GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Results] 87 weeks, 36kg, and purity was the hard part — 55 comments in the full submission. View in context.
3.4k
c/hplc·submitted 2 years ago by u/hana_lehtinen

[Results] 87 weeks, 36kg, and purity was the hard part

Correctionbranch of 9 comments

Long-ish post, sorry. tl;dr at the bottom. I have been tracking LC-MS against eGFR for 29 weeks because I could not find anyone who had. The correlation is weaker than I expected, which is itself mildly interesting given how confidently people link the two in here. Caveats up front: one person, one lab, one assay, no…

Read the full submission and all 55 comments →

This branch

9 comments, started 2 years ago
u/canada_coverage20 points·2 years ago

What was the column and what gradient?

replysharereportpermalink
u/honest_syringe_pls14 points·2 years ago

Did they post the raw trace or just the summary?

replysharereportpermalink
u/rasmus_petrescu6 points·2 years ago

the detector wavelength matters more than people think

replysharereportpermalink
u/micro_bump_mick11 points·2 years ago

Did they post the raw trace or just the summary?

Adding to this: method development is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
u/aksel_kjaer6 points·2 years ago·edited

co-elution is real and LC-MS is usually not enough to resolve it

replysharereportpermalink
u/liv_okafor5 points·2 years ago

a round-robin on baseline integration would be genuinely useful

replysharereportpermalink
u/two_mil_or_one4 points·2 years ago

Small correction: the trial was 24 weeks, not 6. Does not change your point but people will quote it.

replysharereportpermalink
u/fatima_yildiz3 points·2 years ago·edited

Small correction: the trial was 24 weeks, not 6.

Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 98.7% on the same vial is normal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/canada_coverage14 points·2 years ago

Strongly agree. Largest single impurity tells a different story than total purity.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/hplc

The analytical deep end: RP-HPLC methods, gradient design, integration decisions, LC-MS confirmation, amino-acid analysis, water content, and why two labs can report 98.1% and 96.4% on the same vial and both be right. Post the chromatogram, not the summary line.

32kmembers
130submissions
Sep 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
More in c/hplc
c/hplc rules
  1. Chromatogram or it did not happen. Axis labels included.
  2. State the method: column, gradient, detection wavelength, injection volume.
  3. Area% is not mass%. Posts that conflate them get a correction flair, not a removal.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/sig_figs_samu/hplc_hobbyistu/peak_area_peteu/mass_spec_maggie
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →