What I am working with: orforglipron · 40 °C.
This has the shape of a fact but I cannot find its origin.
What I found instead were three secondary sources all citing each other.
Is there data behind this, or is it received wisdom?
40 °C is one of the two points formal stability programmes actually run, so this is the rare case where the literature is looking where you are. Accelerated work is conventionally run at 25 °C and 40 °C, with the refrigerated condition as the control. 40 °C is 35 kelvin above the 5 °C middle of a 2–8 °C refrigerator. The ten-degree rule of thumb — degradation rate roughly doubling per 10 K — makes that about 11 times the refrigerated rate, which is an order-of-magnitude statement and not a shelf life. Whatever you find, check what was measured before you use it: a paper reporting purity at 40 °C has not measured content, and the two fail at different rates for different reasons.
On the detail: asparagine and glutamine are the deamidation risk, and methionine is the oxidation risk.
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.
| State | Condition | Usable window | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lyophilised solid | −20 °C, sealed, dry | 24–36 months | Supplier guidance |
| Lyophilised solid | 2–8 °C, sealed | 12–24 months | Supplier guidance |
| Lyophilised solid | 25 °C, sealed | 4–8 weeks | Extrapolated (Arrhenius) |
| Lyophilised solid | 40 °C, sealed | 1–2 weeks | Extrapolated |
| Solution, preserved | 2–8 °C | 28 days | USP microbiological convention |
| Solution, preserved | 25 °C | 3–7 days | Extrapolated |
| Solution, unpreserved | 2–8 °C | 24 hours | USP microbiological convention |
Windows for the solid state are chemical; windows for solution are microbiological and usually shorter than the chemical limit.
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.
Aggregation at air-liquid interfaces is established from surface-tension and particle-count studies and is the basis for anti-agitation handling guidance.
Swirl, never shake. Aggregation is a handling problem more than a time problem.
edited 20 May 2025 by esben_lykke — expanded the table to cover the lower concentration
Analytical standards and reagents with traceable certificates. Every quantitative result you read inherits the accuracy of the standard behind it.
Shop standardsThe short version: water enables most of it, oxygen enables oxidation, surfaces enable adsorption, and agitation enables aggregation.
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.
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.
Nothing here is medical advice, and research-use compounds are not approved for human use.
A mass spectrum names the pathway. Plus one, plus sixteen, minus eighteen.
edited 19 Jun 2025 by eighty_six_hours — removed a claim I could not source
Answering this needs the physical state, since a dry powder is protected from most of these and a solution is protected from none.
Light exposure matters for tryptophan-containing sequences and for anything with a chromophore. Amber vials and a closed box are free mitigations.
Worth being precise here: 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.
Adsorption losses at low concentrations are quantified in formulation studies and are the reason carrier proteins are used in dilute preparations.
Apparent loss in a dilute preparation is usually adsorption rather than degradation and is worth ruling out first.
At dilute concentrations, suspect adsorption before you suspect chemistry.
This is answerable from the chemistry rather than from anecdote, which is unusual and welcome.
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.
Metal-catalysed oxidation of methionine is documented across peptide and protein formulations and is why chelators appear in some formulations.
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.
Start with the sequence, because which pathways are available depends on which residues are present.
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.
Deamidation via the succinimide intermediate is well characterised, with sequence-dependent rates highest for asparagine-glycine motifs.
Sequence determines which pathways apply, so general statements are general.
Cold, dry, dark, still. Those four words cover most of the mitigation.
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.