Cited by 82Mass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsProtein purification and stabilityBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods

Online Hydrophobic Interaction Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry for the Analysis of Intact Monoclonal Antibodies

Open access
Chen, Bifan, Lin, Ziqing, Alpert, Andrew J., Fu, Cexiong, Zhang, Qunying, Pritts, Wayne A., Ge, Ying·2018·Analytical Chemistry

Abstract

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are an important class of drugs for a wide spectrum of human diseases. Liquid chromatography (LC) coupled to mass spectrometry (MS) is one of the techniques in the forefront for comprehensive characterization of analytical attributes of mAbs. Among various protein chromatography modes, hydrophobic interaction chromatography (HIC) is a popular offline nondenaturing separation technique utilized to purify and analyze mAbs, typically with the use of non-MS-compatible mobile phases. Herein we demonstrate for the first time, the application of direct HIC-MS and HIC-tandem MS (MS/MS) with electron capture dissociation (ECD) for analyzing intact mAbs on quadrupole-time-of-flight (Q-TOF) and Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance (FTICR) mass spectrometers, respectively. Our method allows for rapid determination of relative hydrophobicity, intact masses, and glycosylation profiles of mAbs as well as sequence and structural characterization of the complementarity-determining regions in an online configuration.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.analchem.8b01865

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Chen et al. demonstrated online HIC-MS for determination of relative hydrophobicity, intact masses, and glycosylations of monoclonal antibodies and for gaining sequence and structural information using MS/MS.

    “Chen et al. demonstrated online HIC-MS analysis for determination of the relative hydrophobicity, intact masses, and glycosylations of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) as well as gaining sequence and structural information using MS/MS [81].”
  • The advancement of top-down proteomics is stimulated by commercial growth of large molecule therapeutics such as monoclonal antibodies and antibody-drug-conjugates, because detailed high-throughput characterization and quality control methods are required.

    “Undoubtedly, the advancement of top-down proteomics is stimulated by the commercial growth of large molecule therapeutics such as monoclonal antibodies and antibody-drug-conjugates as detailed and high-throughput methods for their characterization and quality control are required [81,159,160].”
  • Analysis of antibodies by top-down can quickly determine modification state, drug conjugate ratio, quality control screening, and more.

    “For example, analysis of antibodies by top-down can quickly determine the modification state [81], drug conjugate ratio [161], quality control screening [162], and more [163,164].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [18]Formolo T; Ly M; Levy M; Kilpatrick L; Lute S; Phinney K; Marzilli L; Brorson K; Boyne M; Davis D; Schiel J State-of-the-Art and Emerging Technologies for Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibody Characterization, Vol 2: Biopharmaceutical Characterization: The Nistmab Case Study 2015, 1201, 1– 62.
  2. [20]Alain B; François D; Hélène D; Elsa WR; Olivier C; Van DA; Sarah CJ Mass Spectrom 2015, 50, 285– 297.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, B., Lin, Z., Alpert, A. J., Fu, C., Zhang, Q., Pritts, W. A., & Ge, Y.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • PolyLC Inc., Columbia, Maryland 21045, United States
  • AbbVie (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Ge, Ying
Venue
Analytical Chemistry
Published
2018-05-30
Volume
90
Issue
12
Pages
7135-7138
ISSN
  • 0003-2700 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6882
OpenAlex
W2807004475
Cited by
82
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 11
FWCI
3.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Analytical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL096971, R01HL109810)
  • AbbVie
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM117058)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Mass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein purification and stability
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Keywords
monoclonal antibodies, hydrophobic interaction chromatography, glycosylation profiling, hypervariable region, relative hydrophobicity, therapeutic proteins, tandem mass spectrometry, electron capture dissociation, protein structural characterization
MeSH terms
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Chromatography, Liquid, Humans, Mass Spectrometry, Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review