Chromatographia

, Volume 41, Issue 5–6, pp 516–520 | Cite as

A simple model describing the retention behavior of octreotide and its glycosylated derivatives in reversed phase HPLC

  • R. Kuhn
  • C. Morin
  • F. Erni
Originals
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 22 Downloads

Summary

The retention behavior of octreotide, a somatostatin analogue, and its glycosylated derivatives containing different numbers of glucose units has been studied by reversed phase HPLC. A retention model was developed by correlating the logarithm of the retention factor with the hydrophilic-lipophilic balance of the analyte. Linear functions could be derived for all the separation systems investigated. The slopes of the straight lines were a measure of the selectivity of the chromatographic system and enabled calculation of increments for the saccharide groups in different eluent systems. The highest increment was found using trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) as ion pairing agent. The model was extended to substitution of the same peptide with hydrophobic groups such as acetyl and alkyl. Straight lines were again obtained.

The influence of the different eluent systems upon peak shape and retention is also discussed. Owing to the strong peak tailing a dual retention mechanism consisting of hydrophobic and silanophilic interactions was assumed. It was shown that addition of quaternary ammonium compounds to mask the surface silanols of the stationary phase reduced both the peak tailing and the retention of the peptides.

Key Words

Reversed phase HPLC Retention behavior Retention model Octreotide Octreotide glycosides 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    itI. Molnár, C. Horváth, J. Chromatogr.142, 623 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. F. Rekker, “The Hydrophobic Fragmental Constants”, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Y. Nozaki, C. Tanford, J. Biol. Chem.246, 2211 (1971).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Leo, C. Hansch, D. Elkins, Chem. Rev.71, 525 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. P. Segrest, R. J. Feldmann, J. Mol. Biol.87, 853 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    K. J. Wilson, A. Honegger, R. P. Stoetzel, G. J. Hughes, Biochem. J.199, 31,1981b.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    T. Sagasawa, T. Okuyama, D. C. Teller, J. Chromatogr.240, 427 (1983).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    C. T. Mant, T. W. Lorne Burke, J. A. Black, R. S. Hodges, J. Chromatogr.458, 193 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    D. M. Heuman, J. Lipid Res.30, 719 (1989).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. H. List, Arzneiformenlehre, Wiss. Verlagsges., Stuttgart 1976, p. 157.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. D. Katz, B. L. Erstad, Clin. Pharm.8, 255 (1989).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. W. J. Lamberts, Acta Endocr. (Copenh.)116, Suppl. 286, 54 (1987).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Sokolowski, K.-G. Wahlund, J. Chromatogr.189, 299 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Kuhn
    • 1
  • C. Morin
    • 2
  • F. Erni
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für Angewandte ForschungFH ReutlingenReutlingenGermany
  2. 2.Analytical Research and DevelopmentSandoz Pharma Ltd.BaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations