PeptideStack
5.2kquestions
20kanswers
220users

Is there any published stability data for a GLP-1 receptor agonist at minus 20 °C?

Asked 31 Mar 2024Modified 2.0 years agoViewed 38k times
28

What I have: a GLP-1 receptor agonist · minus 20 °C.

I am asking for verification rather than opinion, ideally with something I can read myself.

It is possible the evidence exists and I am searching for the wrong term.

What would count as evidence here, and does it exist?

peptide-stability
peptide-stability

The chemistry of peptide degradation: deamidation, oxidation, hydrolysis, aggregation and fibrillation, and how temperature, pH, ionic strength,…

908 questions
storage
storage

Storage conditions and their evidence base: minus twenty degrees for powder, refrigerated for solution, protection from light, and what the…

701 questions
clinical-trials
clinical-trials

Reading the primary literature properly: estimands, intention-to-treat versus per-protocol, confidence intervals, absolute versus relative…

745 questions
shareeditfollowflag
AB
askedassay_blank45k3831 Mar 2024

5 Answers

Accepted answer first, then by votes
117

Accepted answer

Probably not at minus 20 °C specifically, because that is not where stability programmes take their readings. Accelerated work is conventionally run at 25 °C and 40 °C, with the refrigerated condition as the control, so minus 20 °C sits between or beyond the published points and what you will find is bracketing rather than a measurement. minus 20 °C is 25 kelvin below a refrigerator, and below the glass transition of a lyophilised cake the ten-degree rule of thumb stops applying at all — solid-state chemistry is not slow liquid chemistry, it is a different regime, and the failure modes that survive it are mechanical rather than chemical. Whatever you find, check what was measured before you use it: a paper reporting purity at minus 20 °C has not measured content, and the two fail at different rates for different reasons.

Worth being precise here: asparagine and glutamine are the deamidation risk, and methionine is the oxidation risk.

Deamidation converts asparagine or glutamine to the corresponding acid via a succinimide intermediate, adding one dalton. It is base-catalysed, accelerates above neutral pH and is the dominant aqueous pathway for many peptides.

Aggregation is physical: peptides unfold at air-liquid interfaces and associate. Shaking maximises that interface, which is why swirling and shaking produce visibly different outcomes on the same vial.

Deamidation via the succinimide intermediate is well characterised, with sequence-dependent rates highest for asparagine-glycine motifs.

Cold, dry, dark, still. Those four words cover most of the mitigation.

shareimprove this answerflag
MO
answered · acceptedmarta_okonkwo190k25826 Jun 2024
I have kept vials both ways for a year and this matches what I saw. – fibre_or_fragment 5 months ago
8Worth adding that residual moisture predicts this better than any printed date. – gradient_slope 3 months ago
add a comment
Sponsored

PeptideMeter - Independent Peptide Analytics

Aggregated, published test results and vendor ratings built from submitted batches. Methodology stated, dataset browsable, no listing fees.

Browse results
101

This is answerable from the chemistry rather than from anecdote, which is unusual and welcome.

Hydrolysis cleaves the backbone, most readily at aspartate-proline and aspartate-glycine sequences, and is acid-catalysed. In a dry solid it barely proceeds at all.

It helps to be literal here: oxidation targets methionine, cysteine and tryptophan, adding sixteen daltons per oxygen. It is catalysed by trace metals and promoted by dissolved oxygen and by light.

At dilute concentrations, suspect adsorption before you suspect chemistry.

edited 3 Aug 2024 by otto_brenner — tightened the wording; no substantive change

shareimprove this answerflag
OB
answeredotto_brenner12k167 Jul 2024
7Adding for future readers: the domestic leg after delivery is the part you control. – micron22 5 months ago
add a comment
2

Answer first: the degradation pathways worth knowing are hydrolysis, deamidation, oxidation, aggregation and adsorption, and each has a different trigger and a different mitigation.

Adsorption onto glass and plastic is significant at low concentrations — micrograms per millilitre — and negligible at milligrams per millilitre. It is the usual explanation for an apparent loss in a dilute preparation.

A mass spectrum resolves most of this: minus eighteen is dehydration or succinimide, plus one is deamidation, plus sixteen is oxidation, and an unchanged mass with a shifted retention time is an isomer.

Sequence decides which pathways are even available. Check the residues.

shareimprove this answerflag
HP
answeredh_pergande71k15824 May 2024
1

Aggregation is a physical process and is the one most often caused by handling rather than by time.

Light exposure matters for tryptophan-containing sequences and for anything with a chromophore. Amber vials and a closed box are free mitigations.

Aggregation at air-liquid interfaces is established from surface-tension and particle-count studies and is the basis for anti-agitation handling guidance.

A mass spectrum names the pathway. Plus one, plus sixteen, minus eighteen.

shareimprove this answerflag
DA
answeredDr_Rosalind_Achebe69k14719 Jul 2024
-3

The relevant point is that a mass shift of plus one dalton is deamidation and plus sixteen is oxidation, so degradation is often visible in a mass spectrum if anyone looks.

Freeze-thaw cycling drives aggregation through concentration at the ice interface and pH shifts as buffer components crystallise out at different rates. Each cycle costs something.

The caveat is that none of these pathways can be seen by looking at a vial, and a clear solution can be substantially degraded.

Swirl, never shake. Aggregation is a handling problem more than a time problem.

shareimprove this answerflag
HP
answeredh_pergande71k1581 Apr 2024

Your answer

Ask PeptideStack is a static archive. Posting is closed, but the norms are worth stating: answer the question that was asked, show your working, cite the trial or the certificate, and say plainly where the evidence runs out.

Not medical advice. Research-use-only compounds are not approved for human use.