The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Topic summary

Spike-and-recover accuracy for a peptide assay

This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 127, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.
TS
taper_shiftTL3Regular7 Apr 2026 · edited#11

Coming back to post #9, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Two things before anyone answers the substance.

First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.

30 likes 4mo
CI
c.inglethorpeTL3Regular7 Apr 2026#26

I read post #24 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Why two laboratories may disagree: after validating the same method, they may still report different purity on the same sample due to integration differences, column age differences, subtle differences in mobile phase pH or temperature. This is normal and not a sign that one is wrong.

31 likes 4mo
MS
m.steinerTL2 Moderator8 Apr 2026#34
h.amankwah, post #21: Picking up post #18: that is the part I would want checked first. Range: the concentration range over which the method has been validated. Going outside the validated range is going outside the method's demonstrated performance. Go to post

Accuracy: the method measures what you intend to measure. For purity methods, this is tested by spike-and-recover experiments: add a known amount of impurity to a sample and measure whether you recover the added amount.

29 likes in reply to #21 4mo
SC
so.cardosoTL2 Moderator8 Apr 2026#39

Two things before anyone answers the substance.

First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.

28 likes 4mo
LA
l.aaltonenTL3Regular9 Apr 2026#59
r.nakamura, post #38: I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological. The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient. Go to post

Limits of detection and quantitation: LOD is the lowest concentration that produces a signal above background. LOQ is the lowest concentration at which the method meets precision and accuracy acceptance criteria. Both are determined empirically.

31 likes in reply to #38 4mo
DN
d.nilsenTL2 Moderator9 Apr 2026 · edited#65

Accuracy: the method measures what you intend to measure. For purity methods, this is tested by spike-and-recover experiments: add a known amount of impurity to a sample and measure whether you recover the added amount.

28 likes 4mo
HK
h.koodziejTL2Member10 Apr 2026#102

Range: the concentration range over which the method has been validated. Going outside the validated range is going outside the method's demonstrated performance.

30 likes 4mo
D
DKwiatkowskiTL3Regular10 Apr 2026#114

On post #110 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Limits of detection and quantitation: LOD is the lowest concentration that produces a signal above background. LOQ is the lowest concentration at which the method meets precision and accuracy acceptance criteria. Both are determined empirically.

31 likes 4mo
TK
t.karlsenTL2 Moderator11 Apr 2026#127

Robustness: the method gives consistent results when minor parameters vary. Tested by deliberately varying pH, temperature, flow rate, and mobile phase composition within reasonable ranges and demonstrating that results stay within acceptance.

32 likes 4mo

Read the full topic (127 posts)

Suggested topics

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
Revisiting: Sample handling between despatch and injection
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Revisiting: Sample handling between despatch and injection Everything below is what sits behind that. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three…
DVEAGTEMNG+5 9 1.1k 6mo
Validating a method you did not develop — does this still hold?
Validating a method you did not develop — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I would like to understand what this number means…
AAEFNRRBFE+128 148 47k 16mo
Coming back to: Specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, range, robustness — with real criteria
On the subject in the title: Specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, range, robustness — with real criteria Working notes rather than a conclusion. Posting the method first, because I know what the first…
AWHNFJCOT+93 99 1.4k 6d
Repeatability versus intermediate precision
Repeatability versus intermediate precision — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three replies will otherwise be.…
LSKAILWNO+119 134 34k 13mo
LOD and LOQ: definitions people get wrong
LOD and LOQ: definitions people get wrong — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A documentation question rather than an analytical one. I have a certificate in front of me that…
EISFCN 2 43k 8mo

Related topics — sharing the tags linearity, system suitability, stability-indicating method

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
Forced degradation studies: designing one that is informative
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Forced degradation studies: designing one that is informative Everything below is what sits behind that. Working through the identity arithmetic and I would like it…
MPTIEMHKSL+100 106 35k 2d
Revisiting: Sample handling between despatch and injection
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Revisiting: Sample handling between despatch and injection Everything below is what sits behind that. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three…
DVEAGTEMNG+5 9 1.1k 6mo
Sample handling between despatch and injection
Sample handling between despatch and injection Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three replies will…
KREHSSNCNA+63 68 2.4k 3mo
Resolution and tailing factor: real acceptance criteria
Resolution and tailing factor: real acceptance criteria Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I would like to understand what this number means before I repeat it…
NLPNV 2 15k 1mo
Repeatability versus intermediate precision
Repeatability versus intermediate precision — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three replies will otherwise be.…
LSKAILWNO+119 134 34k 13mo