At 37 °C it can show up as either, and which one depends entirely on whether the product still elutes under the main peak. Purity is a ratio of areas, so a degradant only costs purity if the method resolves it. Content is a mass against a standard, so a degradant costs content whenever the parent is consumed — resolved or not. Ordered beta-sheet assembly, effectively irreversible, and its endpoint is opalescence you can see rather than a peak you can integrate. That is why the two measurements are not interchangeable and why an unchanged purity figure after an excursion to 37 °C is weak evidence: the method may simply be integrating the degradant along with the parent and reporting the sum as one peak.
Worth being precise here: asparagine and glutamine are the deamidation risk, and methionine is the oxidation risk.
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.
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.
Deamidation via the succinimide intermediate is well characterised, with sequence-dependent rates highest for asparagine-glycine motifs.
The caveat is that none of these pathways can be seen by looking at a vial, and a clear solution can be substantially degraded.
Sequence decides which pathways are even available. Check the residues.
edited 20 Sept 2024 by nine_point_nine — added the placebo-arm figures
5The doubling-per-ten-degrees rule is the part I did not know and now use constantly. – Dr_Bram_Verhoeven 3 months ago add a comment