ReviewElectrophoresis2025
Peak Integration of Electropherograms in GMP and Research Labs: Navigating Increased Scrutiny Amid Data Integrity Audits and Inspections.
Review in Electrophoresis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improvement of Peak Integration in Capillary Electrophoresis: Reference Data Set No. 1.Electrophoresis · 2026Article
- Peak Integration of Electropherograms in GMP and Research Labs: Navigating Increased Scrutiny Amid Data Integrity Audits and Inspections.Electrophoresis · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Capillary electrophoresis (CE) often offers superior separation relative to chromatography for macromolecules like monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), a major pharmaceutical class. However, electropherogram baselines pose challenges that traditional chromatography algorithms cannot address, requiring complex integration processes. Integration in good manufacturing practice (GMP) laboratories is critically important and has become a focus of data integrity-centric regulatory inspections. Electropherogram integration challenges, the increased use of CE, data systems developed for chromatograms rather than electropherograms, and the increased regulatory scrutiny call for a resolution. This necessity also extends to R&D, clinical, and academic labs. This review examines authoritative sources such as pharmacopoeias, World Health Organization (WHO), Parenteral Drug Association (PDA), and scientific literature. However, none address electropherogram integration. These sources concur that companies should develop integration policies and SOPs. Training programs must ensure analysts are proficient in integration techniques and reviewers are appropriately qualified to assess integrations. Integration parameters must be captured, including slope sensitivity, smoothing factors, and timed events like peak start and stop and baseline correction. Analytical procedures (APs) should include illustrations that define proper integration. Although automatic integration is preferred for its efficiency and objectivity, it is not always accurate. Therefore, manual integration should be permitted under specific conditions, with all settings and iterations documented, justified, and reviewed. Industry collaboration is proposed to create practical integration guidelines specifically for CE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.