PeptideStack
5.2kquestions
20kanswers
220users

Is liraglutide at 2.5 mg/mL stable enough for four weeks of multi-withdrawal use?

Asked 30 Apr 2024Modified 2.0 years agoViewed 28k times
14

The specifics, since they change the answer: liraglutide · 2.5 mg/mL · four weeks.

Somebody stated this to me confidently and I would like to check it before repeating it.

I would accept a well-reasoned negative answer over a poorly sourced positive one.

How well supported is this claim?

peptide-stability
peptide-stability

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

832 questions
bacteriostatic-water
bacteriostatic-water

Water for injection containing roughly 0.9 per cent benzyl alcohol as a bacteriostatic agent. It suppresses growth in a multiple-withdrawal vial;…

112 questions
shelf-life
shelf-life

How long a preparation remains within specification: labelled expiry for a sealed lyophilised vial, beyond-use dating after reconstitution, and…

301 questions
shareeditfollowflag
PS
askedplunger_stop18k2830 Apr 2024
8Useful. I have added the accept threshold suggestion to my own notes. – vialroom 2 months ago
add a comment

5 Answers

Accepted answer first, then by votes
29

Accepted answer

Degradation is not one process, and which one dominates depends on the condition you are asking about. In solution at refrigerated temperature the rate-limiting pathway is usually deamidation and hydrolysis; at room temperature aggregation overtakes them; frozen, the damage happens during the transitions rather than during the hold.

The temperature dependence is roughly Arrhenius over the range that matters, which in practice means every ten degrees of increase roughly doubles to triples the rate. Ten days at thirty degrees is therefore comparable to something on the order of a month or two at four degrees — bad, but not the catastrophe it feels like when you open a warm parcel.

Degradation pathway by condition

PathwayDominant whenDetected by
DeamidationSolution, neutral to alkaline pHRP-HPLC, +1 Da on MS
OxidationLight, trace metals, peroxidesRP-HPLC, +16 Da on MS
HydrolysisSolution, extremes of pHRP-HPLC, fragment masses
AggregationAgitation, interfaces, high concentrationSEC, visual haze; often invisible on RP-HPLC
Freeze-concentration damageFreeze-thaw of buffered solutionSEC, loss of recovered content

Stated carefully, adsorption to the container is a real loss at low concentration. For a peptide at 0.1 mg/mL in an untreated glass vial, single-digit percentage losses to the wall are plausible; at 5 mg/mL it is negligible. This is one of several reasons not to reconstitute to a very dilute working solution and store it.

General guidance on lyophilised peptide storage from the major synthesis houses converges on minus twenty degrees for long-term storage of solids and refrigerated storage for solutions in use, with the explicit note that repeated freeze-thaw of solutions should be avoided. It is consistent advice precisely because it follows from the chemistry rather than from a study.

Store solid, store cold, store dry, and reconstitute what you will use rather than what fits in the vial.

shareimprove this answerflag
JH
answered · acceptedjana_horakova15k2713 Jun 2024
4Worth adding that the method section is where the answer usually is. – s_kalniete 7 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
12

On the detail: freeze-thaw damage happens at the moving ice front, not at the storage temperature. Once the sample is frozen solid and cold, very little is happening. The damage is done during freezing and thawing, which is why the number of cycles matters and the duration of the hold mostly does not.

Aggregation is the failure mode that reverse-phase HPLC is worst at detecting, because a large soluble aggregate may not elute at all and an insoluble one is filtered out during sample preparation. If your purity result comes back normal but the vial looks hazy, believe the vial. Size-exclusion chromatography is the method that sees this.

Light matters for specific residues rather than in general. Tryptophan and to a lesser extent tyrosine and methionine are photo-labile; a sequence without them is largely indifferent to ambient light over the timescales in question. Amber glass is cheap insurance rather than a requirement.

The Arrhenius relationship underpinning accelerated stability testing is the basis of ICH Q1A, which is why accelerated studies at 40 °C and 75 per cent relative humidity are used to predict shelf life at 25 °C. The same relationship lets you reason about a warm transit lane, with the same caveats about extrapolation.

If the material arrived warm and it was lyophilised, test it and proceed on the result. If it arrived warm and it was in solution, the result is more likely to be interesting than reassuring.

shareimprove this answerflag
DV
answeredDr_Bram_Verhoeven85k2481 Jun 2024
5Two of us worked through this independently and arrived here, so it is at least reproducible. – Dr_Marek_Zielinski 10 months ago
6Worth adding that the method section is where the answer usually is. – marta_okonkwo 2 months ago
add a comment
6

Start by separating chemical degradation from physical degradation, because they fail differently and they are detected differently. Chemical degradation changes the molecule and shows up as new peaks on a chromatogram. Physical degradation aggregates the molecule and often shows up as nothing at all on reverse-phase HPLC, because the aggregate never makes it onto the column.

For the solid state, residual moisture is the dominant variable. A cake at two per cent water is considerably more stable than the same cake at six per cent, because water is both a reactant in hydrolysis and a plasticiser that lowers the glass transition temperature. This is why a desiccant in the outer packaging is not theatre, and why opening a cold vial in a humid room is a genuine error — you condense water onto the cake.

Stated carefully, freeze-concentration is the mechanism people miss. As ice forms, everything that is not water is excluded into a shrinking unfrozen fraction, so the local concentration of peptide, buffer salts and preservative rises sharply. If the buffer components crystallise at different rates, local pH can shift by more than a unit. That is why a phosphate-buffered solution can behave badly on freezing while an unbuffered one is fine.

Deamidation kinetics for asparagine in peptides are well characterised and strongly sequence-dependent: the residue following the asparagine dominates the rate, with glycine and serine at the n+1 position accelerating it by an order of magnitude relative to bulkier residues. That is why two peptides in the same buffer at the same temperature can have quite different shelf lives.

Minimise transitions rather than minimising temperature. One freeze and one thaw is fine; five is a different question.

edited 22 May 2024 by tess_amankwah — updated for the 2026 guidance change

shareimprove this answerflag
TA
answeredtess_amankwah48k3810 May 2024
6

Stated carefully, the lyophilised solid is far more robust than anything anyone says about it, and the solution is far less robust. Most of the confusion in this area comes from advice about one being applied to the other.

Practical thermal arithmetic for a shipment: a single 250 g phase-change pack in a thin-walled polystyrene box holds sub-ten-degrees for roughly 24 to 48 hours in a 25 °C ambient, and considerably less at 35 °C. Any lane taking eight to fourteen days is therefore not temperature-controlled for most of its duration regardless of what was in the box, which is the argument for shipping the material lyophilised.

The licensed semaglutide and tirzepatide presentations carry in-use periods of several weeks at room temperature in their labelling, which is the closest thing to real stability data in this space — and it applies to a buffered, surfactant-containing, preservative-containing formulation, not to a reconstituted research vial.

The limitation is that you cannot detect slow aggregation by eye until it is well advanced, so a clear vial is weak evidence of an intact one.

The single highest-value change most people can make is buying a cheap logging thermometer, because it converts an assumption about their storage into a record.

shareimprove this answerflag
TG
answeredtandem_gradient85k24821 May 2024
2Adding for future readers: the certificate should carry the lot number, not just a batch code. – marta_okonkwo 8 months ago
add a comment
-1

Specifically, a warm arrival is a reason to test, not automatically a reason to discard. Peptide degradation is kinetic — rate multiplied by time — and a few days at thirty degrees in the solid state is a small integral compared to weeks in solution.

On re-freezing something that thawed in transit: if it arrived as a lyophilised solid that warmed but never got wet, re-freezing costs you nothing except the thermal cycle. If it arrived as a solution that thawed, re-freezing adds a second transition and therefore a second dose of ice-front shear. The asymmetry is worth internalising.

I would be careful about generalising across sequences. Stability is sequence-specific, and a rule derived from semaglutide will not transfer cleanly to a tri-agonist with different residues in different local environments.

The practical rule is that time and temperature multiply, so shorten whichever one you control.

edited 4 Aug 2024 by fib4_reader — reworded for clarity after a comment

shareimprove this answerflag
FR
answeredfib4_reader35k3827 Jul 2024
5Adding for future readers: the certificate should carry the lot number, not just a batch code. – sinead_gaffney 5 months ago
add a comment

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.