95.2 per cent is at the top of what stepwise synthesis delivers on a chain this long, and it is reachable rather than fictional. Every coupling is high-yielding and none is quantitative, so the deletion and truncation sequences that survive purification are what occupies the remaining 4.8 per cent. Above roughly 98 per cent you are fighting the purification rather than the synthesis, which is why a 95.2 per cent figure on ecnoglutide deserves a method question — column, gradient, wavelength — rather than either belief or dismissal.
The underlying point is that purity is a method-dependent figure, and that is not a limitation of the measurement, it is a property of what the measurement actually answers.
Tailing factor measures peak shape, and a badly tailing peak spreads into the region where small impurities live, forcing tangent-skim integration that assigns tail area to the main peak.
What each test answers
| Test | Answers | Does NOT answer |
|---|
| RP-HPLC, area % | What fraction of detected material is the target | How much target is present |
| Quantified content | Milligrams of peptide per vial | What the impurities are |
| ESI-MS identity | Whether the molecular weight matches | Purity, or isomeric substitution |
| Peptide mapping | Sequence, localised to a fragment | Quantity |
| Karl Fischer | Water content of the solid | Solvent content |
| LAL endotoxin | Pyrogen load in EU/mg | Sterility |
| Sterility test | Growth in defined media over 14 days | Endotoxin, or bioburden count |
Detection wavelength matters because 214 nm sees the peptide backbone while 280 nm sees only aromatic side chains — so truncation impurities lacking a tryptophan are invisible at 280 nm.
The practical summary: ask for the chromatogram and the method, and ignore the headline number until you have both.