HILIC-UPLC for Glycan Analysis: A Comprehensive Comparison with LC-MS, CE-LIF, and Other Key Methods

Abstract

This article provides a critical evaluation of Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography-Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography (HILIC-UPLC) alongside other prominent techniques for glycan analysis, including capillary electrophoresis-laser induced fluorescence (CE-LIF), mass spectrometry (MS)-based methods, and porous graphitic carbon (PGC) chromatography. Tailored for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, it explores the foundational principles of each method, their specific applications in monitoring Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) of biopharmaceuticals like monoclonal antibodies, and practical guidance for method selection, troubleshooting, and optimization. By synthesizing findings from recent comparative and validation studies, this review offers a validated framework for selecting the most appropriate analytical strategy based on required throughput, sensitivity, precision, and structural resolution.

Glycan Analysis Fundamentals: Why Method Choice Impacts Biopharmaceutical Quality and Efficacy

The development of therapeutic proteins, including monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), has revolutionized the treatment of cancer, autoimmune diseases, and other conditions. Among the various post-translational modifications, glycosylation stands out as a Critical Quality Attribute (CQA) with profound implications for the safety, efficacy, and stability of biotherapeutics. Glycosylation refers to the enzymatic attachment of oligosaccharide chains (glycans) to specific amino acid residues on a protein. For immunoglobulin G (IgG)-based therapeutics, this occurs primarily at the conserved asparagine 297 (Asn-297) position in the Fc region. These glycans are not merely decorative; they are essential for structural integrity, effector functions, and pharmacokinetic behavior [1] [2].

The glycosylation profile of a therapeutic protein is a key CQA because of its high heterogeneity and significant impact on drug performance. The "glycan shield" can influence a drug's solubility, stability, pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, and effector functions such as antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) [1] [2]. Consequently, regulatory guidelines mandate thorough characterization and monitoring of glycosylation during bioprocess development and manufacturing to ensure consistent product quality. This guide examines the impact of glycosylation, frames the discussion within the context of analytical method comparison, and provides detailed experimental protocols for glycan analysis.

The Impact of Specific Glycan Structures on Therapeutic Protein Quality

The biological impact of glycosylation is determined by the presence or absence of specific terminal sugar residues. The table below summarizes the effects of key monosaccharides on the quality and performance of therapeutic proteins.

Table 1: Impact of Terminal Sugar Residues on Therapeutic Protein Quality Attributes

Sugar Residue	Impact on Effector Functions	Impact on Pharmacokinetics (PK)	Impact on Immunogenicity
Core Fucose	Decreased fucosylation significantly enhances ADCC by increasing binding to FcγRIIIa on natural killer cells [3] [2].	Minimal direct impact on PK is reported for the absence of core fucose [1].	Not typically associated with increased immunogenicity in human-derived systems [2].
Galactose	Can enhance CDC by improving the binding of C1q to the Fc region [2]. A more "open" Fc conformation is associated with galactosylation [2].	No major direct impact on serum half-life is reported for galactose variants [1].	Not a major driver of immunogenicity for proteins produced in mammalian cell lines like CHO [2].
Sialic Acid	May decrease ADCC and induce anti-inflammatory effects [3] [2].	Can modulate PK via interactions with other receptors; not directly linked to rapid clearance [1].	Non-human sialic acids (e.g., NGNA) can be immunogenic [2].
Mannose	High-mannose forms can alter FcγR binding and modulate ADCC [2].	High-mannose types are cleared more rapidly from serum via the mannose receptor on sinusoidal endothelial cells [1] [2].	Can potentially increase immunogenicity, particularly if non-human or high-mannose structures are present [4] [5].

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationship between glycosylation analysis, the identified glycan structures, and their subsequent impact on the critical quality attributes of a therapeutic protein.

Analytical Method Comparison: HILIC-UPLC Versus Alternatives

Monitoring glycosylation as a CQA requires robust, precise, and accurate analytical methods. A comprehensive 2014 study directly compared seven non-mass spectrometric, separation-based methods for Fc-glycosylation profiling of a therapeutic IgG1 [3]. All methods showed excellent precision and accuracy, but key differences emerged in resolution, throughput, and ability to detect minor glycan species like sialylated glycans.

Table 2: Comparison of Separation-Based Methods for Glycan Analysis [3]

Method	Principle	Key Strengths	Limitations/Considerations
HILIC-UPLC (2-AB)	Hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography with UPLC separation of fluorescently labeled glycans [3].	High resolution and peak capacity; excellent precision; considered a reference method [3] [6].	Requires derivatization; resolution can be influenced by column chemistry and mobile phase [6].
CE-LIF (APTS)	Capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection [3].	High resolution; fast analysis times; excellent for separating charged glycan isoforms [3].	Different labeling and hardware systems (e.g., Beckman Coulter, Applied Biosystems) can vary [3].
HPAEC-PAD	High-pH anion-exchange chromatography with pulsed amperometric detection [3].	No labeling required; detects native glycans [3].	Lower compatibility with MS; electrochemical detection can be less robust [3] [6].
PGC-LC	Porous graphitic carbon liquid chromatography [6].	Remarkable selectivity for isomeric glycans; strong retention of charged glycans [6].	Strong adsorption of analytes; retention depends on temperature and redox state of the material [6].
RPC	Reversed-phase chromatography of labeled glycans [6].	Good for high-throughput analysis when combined with UHPLC [6].	Low retentivity for hydrophilic glycans; often requires ion-pairing reagents [6].

HILIC-UPLC has emerged as a leading technique, particularly for its superior peak capacity and resolution when analyzing complex glycan samples [6]. The high acetonitrile content in the mobile phase results in low backpressure, allowing the use of long columns on standard UHPLC systems to achieve high separation efficiency [6]. In the comparative study, HILIC profiling of 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB)-labeled glycans served as the reference method against which others were benchmarked [3].

Detailed Experimental Protocols for Key Glycan Analysis Methods

To ensure the reliable data required for CQA monitoring, standardized and detailed protocols are essential. The following sections describe two foundational approaches.

Protocol for HILIC-UPLC Glycan Profiling

This protocol is widely used for the relative quantitation of different glycan species and is suitable for quality control and comparability studies [7].

• N-glycan Release: Add PNGase F enzyme to the glycoprotein sample (typically 5-100 µg) and incubate to enzymatically release N-glycans from the polypeptide backbone [7].
• Fluorescent Labeling: Label the released glycans with a fluorophore such as 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB). This stoichiometric reaction (one label per glycan) enables relative quantitation via fluorescence detection [7].
• Purification: Remove excess fluorescent label and reaction by-products from the labeled glycan sample using solid-phase extraction or other purification methods [7].
• HILIC-UPLC Analysis:
  • Column: Use a dedicated HILIC-UHPLC stationary phase (e.g., BEH Glycan or similar).
  • Mobile Phase: Typically a gradient from a high organic content (e.g., 75-85% acetonitrile) to an aqueous buffer.
  • Detection: Fluorescence detection (Ex: 330 nm, Em: 420 nm for 2-AB).
  • Data Analysis: Identify glycans by comparing their retention times to an external standard of 2-AB labeled glucose oligomers, which provides a normalized Glucose Unit (GU) value. Compare sample GU values to a known database for preliminary structural assignment [7].

Protocol for Multidimensional HPLC Mapping for Detailed Structural Analysis

For in-depth characterization, multidimensional HPLC offers a powerful orthogonal approach, as outlined by the Glycoscience Protocols resource [8].

• Glycan Release and Labeling: Release N-glycans from glycoproteins by hydrazinolysis or enzymatic digestion. Label the released glycans with 2-aminopyridine (PA) via reductive amination [8].
• Anion-Exchange Chromatography (1st Dimension):
  • Column: TSKgel DEAE-5PW or similar.
  • Separation Principle: Separates PA-glycans based on the number of sialic acid residues or sulfate groups (charge).
  • Elution: Linear gradient of increasing ionic strength (e.g., 0% to 20% of 10% acetonitrile/7.4% triethylamine/3% acetic acid over 35 minutes).
  • Process: Collect fractions for further analysis [8].
• Reversed-Phase Chromatography (2nd Dimension):
  • Column: ODS column (e.g., Shim-pack HRC-ODS).
  • Separation Principle: Separates glycans based on hydrophobicity.
  • Elution: Linear gradient of increasing 1-butanol concentration in phosphate buffer over 60 minutes.
  • Calibration: Normalize elution times to Glucose Units (GU) using a PA-glucose oligomer standard [8].
• Normal-Phase Chromatography (3rd Dimension):
  • Column: TSKgel Amide-80 or similar.
  • Separation Principle: Separates glycans based on hydrophilicity and size.
  • Elution: Linear gradient of increasing aqueous content in an acetonitrile/triethylamine/acetic acid buffer over 30 minutes.
  • Calibration: Again, normalize elution times to GU [8].
• Structural Identification: Plot the GU values from the ODS and Amide-80 columns on a 2D graph, along with the charge information from the DEAE column. Compare this coordinated data (e.g., ODS-GU, Amide-GU, charge) to a known database like GALAXY (http://www.glycoanalysis.info/) to propose specific glycan structures [8].

The workflow for this detailed structural analysis is summarized in the diagram below.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagents and Materials for Glycan Analysis

Successful execution of glycan analysis requires specific reagents and tools. The following table lists essential items and their functions based on the cited protocols.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for Glycan Analysis

Reagent / Tool	Function / Application	Reference
PNGase F	Enzyme for releasing N-linked glycans from glycoproteins.	[7]
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent dye for labeling released glycans for detection in HILIC-UPLC.	[3] [7]
2-Aminopyridine (PA)	Fluorescent dye for labeling glycans for multidimensional HPLC analysis.	[8]
HILIC-UHPLC Column	Stationary phase (e.g., BEH Glycan) for separating labeled glycans based on hydrophilicity.	[6] [7]
TSKgel Amide-80 Column	Normal-phase column for the separation of PA-labeled glycans by hydrophilicity and size.	[8]
Glucose Oligomer Standard	A standard ladder of glucose polymers used to normalize retention times to Glucose Units (GU) for glycan identification.	[8] [7]
GALAXY / GUIDEDB Database	Web database containing HPLC elution data for hundreds of known glycan structures, used for matching experimental GU values.	[8]
(R)-Leucic acid	(R)-2-Hydroxy-4-methylpentanoic Acid|CAS 20312-37-2	High-purity (R)-2-Hydroxy-4-methylpentanoic acid for research. A key biomarker and intermediate for metabolic disorder studies. For Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.
Bromo-PEG4-Azide	Bromo-PEG4-Azide, MF:C10H20BrN3O4, MW:326.19 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Glycosylation is a definitive Critical Quality Attribute that directly influences the efficacy, safety, and stability of therapeutic proteins like mAbs and ADCs. The specific glycan structures—presence or absence of fucose, galactose, sialic acid, and high-mannose types—dictate critical performance metrics including ADCC, CDC, pharmacokinetic profile, and immunogenic potential. Robust analytical control strategies are therefore non-negotiable.

As demonstrated, techniques like HILIC-UPLC provide high-resolution, precise profiling ideal for routine monitoring and comparability studies, while multidimensional HPLC offers unparalleled structural detail for in-depth characterization. The choice of analytical method must be guided by the specific need for throughput, resolution, or structural elucidation. A deep understanding of glycosylation's impact, coupled with rigorous analytical monitoring, is fundamental to developing successful, high-quality biotherapeutics.

The analysis of released N-glycans is a cornerstone of glycobiology, enabling detailed characterization of glycosylation patterns critical for understanding protein function and in biopharmaceutical quality control. This guide delves into the two fundamental pillars of this analytical process: the enzymatic release of glycans from glycoproteins and their subsequent derivatization with fluorescent tags. We objectively compare the performance of three prevalent labels—2-AB, 2-AA, and APTS—within the context of modern analytical techniques like HILIC-UPLC, providing structured data on their sensitivity, compatibility, and applications to inform method selection for research and drug development.

Protein N-glycosylation is a critical post-translational modification that influences key physiological and pathological processes, including protein stability, immune responses, and cell signaling [9] [10]. The analysis of native, underivatized glycans is challenging due to their inherent lack of a chromophore or fluorophore, poor ionization efficiency in mass spectrometry, and high hydrophilicity, which complicates separation [11] [12]. To overcome these hurdles, the field relies on a two-step workflow: first, enzymatically releasing glycans from the protein backbone, and second, derivatizing them with fluorescent tags. This process facilitates sensitive detection, improves separation, and allows for accurate quantification [11]. The choice of release method and fluorescent label significantly impacts the sensitivity, resolution, and overall success of the analysis, guiding the selection of subsequent separation and detection platforms such as Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography coupled with Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography (HILIC-UPLC).

Core Principle 1: Enzymatic Release of N-Glycans

The first critical step in N-glycan analysis is their efficient and intact release from the glycoprotein. Enzymatic release is the most widely used method due to its specificity and gentleness.

The Role of PNGase F

N-glycans are most commonly released enzymatically using Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) [11]. This enzyme cleaves the amide bond between the asparagine residue of the protein and the core GlcNAc of the N-glycan, resulting in a free, intact glycan with a reactive aldehyde group at its reducing end [9]. This aldehyde group is essential for the subsequent fluorescent labeling step via reductive amination. The release is typically performed after denaturing the protein to make the glycosylation sites accessible to the enzyme.

Standard Enzymatic Release Protocol

A typical protocol for releasing N-glycans from a model glycoprotein like IgG involves the following steps [10]:

• Denaturation: The dried IgG sample is resuspended and denatured by incubation with a solution of SDS (e.g., 1.33% w/v) at 65°C for 10 minutes.
• Surfactant Addition: A non-ionic surfactant like Igepal-CA630 (e.g., 4% v/v) is added to neutralize the SDS and prevent its interference with the enzyme.
• Enzymatic Cleavage: PNGase F (e.g., 1.2 units) in a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) buffer is added to the mixture.
• Incubation: The sample is incubated overnight (approximately 16-18 hours) at 37°C to allow for complete release of N-glycans.

This protocol yields a mixture of released glycans ready for purification and derivatization.

Core Principle 2: Fluorescent Labeling of Glycans

Following release, glycans are derivatized with a fluorescent tag to enable detection and enhance analysis.

The Chemistry of Reductive Amination

The primary chemistry for attaching fluorescent labels to the reducing end of glycans is reductive amination [11]. This one-pot reaction involves:

• Condensation: The primary amine group of the fluorescent label reacts with the aldehyde group of the free glycan, forming an imine (Schiff base).
• Reduction: A reducing agent, such as sodium cyanoborohydride (NaCNBH₃) or the less toxic alternative 2-picoline borane [13] [11], reduces the imine to a stable secondary amine.

A key advantage of this reaction is the stoichiometric attachment of a single label molecule per glycan molecule, allowing for direct relative quantification based on fluorescence intensity [11] [10].

Comparison of Major Fluorescent Labels

The selection of a fluorescent tag is crucial and depends on the required detection sensitivity and the analytical platform used. The table below summarizes the core properties of 2-AB, 2-AA, and APTS.

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Common Fluorescent Labels for N-Glycan Analysis.

Label	Charge	Key Feature	Primary Detection	Excitation/Emission (nm)
2-AB	Neutral	Standard label for HILIC profiling; widely used [11].	FLR, MS (poor ionization) [10]	~250 / 428 [12]
2-AA	Negative (-1)	Versatile; good for HPLC, CE, and negative-mode MS [11] [12].	FLR, MS (negative mode)	320-365 / 420-434 [13] [12]
APTS	Negative (-3)	Excellent for CE and CGE due to strong electrophoretic mobility [11].	FLR (LIF)	ND

FLR: Fluorescence; MS: Mass Spectrometry; CE: Capillary Electrophoresis; CGE: Capillary Gel Electrophoresis; LIF: Laser-Induced Fluorescence; ND: Not Disclosed in search results.

Standard Labeling Protocol for 2-AB and 2-AA

A generalized protocol for labeling with 2-AB or 2-AA via reductive amination is as follows [13] [10]:

• Prepare Labeling Mixture: The dye (e.g., 2-AA or 2-AB) and a reducing agent (sodium cyanoborohydride or 2-picoline borane) are dissolved in a DMSO/Acetic acid solution.
• Add Reagent: The labeling mixture is added to the dried, released N-glycan sample.
• Incubate: The reaction vial is sealed and incubated at 65°C for 2-3 hours.
• Cleanup: After cooling, excess dye and reagents are removed using solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridges, such as HILIC-based LudgerClean T1 or S cartridges [13].

Comparative Performance Data in HILIC-UPLC-FLR-MS

The performance of a fluorescent label is quantifiable in terms of sensitivity and detection limits when used with HILIC-UPLC coupled to fluorescence (FLR) and mass spectrometry (MS) detection.

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Comparison of 2-AB, Procainamide, and RapiFluor-MS in HILIC-UPLC-FLR-MS. Data adapted from a comparative study using IgG as a model glycoprotein [10].

Performance Metric	2-AB	Procainamide (ProA)	RapiFluor-MS (RF-MS)
Relative FLR Sensitivity	1 (Baseline)	~15x higher than 2-AB	~3.75x higher than 2-AB
Relative MS Sensitivity (ESI+)	1 (Baseline)	~34x higher than 2-AB	~68x higher than 2-AB
Limit of Quantification (LOQ)	Highest (Least Sensitive)	Comparable to RF-MS	Comparable to ProA
Labeling Efficiency	High and comparable to ProA and RF-MS [10]	High and comparable to 2-AB and RF-MS [10]	High and comparable to 2-AB and ProA [10]
Key Advantage	Established, wide databases [11]	Highest FLR sensitivity	Highest MS sensitivity, fast tagging (5 min)

Note: While ProA and RF-MS were directly compared to 2-AB in this study, APTS was not part of this specific comparison. APTS is generally preferred for CE-based analyses rather than HILIC-UPLC [11].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful released N-glycan analysis relies on a suite of specialized reagents and materials.

Table 3: Key Reagents and Kits for Released N-Glycan Analysis.

Reagent / Kit	Function	Key Feature
PNGase F	Enzymatically releases N-glycans from glycoproteins.	High specificity, leaves intact glycan with reducing terminus [11].
2-AA Labeling Kit	Derivatizes glycans for fluorescence and MS detection.	Available with non-toxic 2-picoline borane reductant [13] [11]. Higher fluorescence and labeling efficiency than 2-AB [13].
2-AB Labeling Kit	Derivatizes glycans for fluorescence detection.	Widely used; established HILIC elution databases [11].
APTS Labeling Kit	Derivatizes glycans for Capillary Electrophoresis.	Imparts strong negative charge for high-resolution CE-LIF [11].
HILIC-SPE Cartridges	Purifies released and labeled glycans.	Removes salts, detergents, and excess dye after labeling [13] [14].
Protein G Plates	Isolates IgG from complex biofluids like plasma.	Enables high-throughput glycomics from specific proteins [12] [10].
MK-4256	MK-4256|Potent SSTR3 Antagonist|For Research	MK-4256 is a potent, selective SSTR3 antagonist for Type 2 Diabetes research. For Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.
Wofapyrin	Wofapyrin, CAS:8066-94-2, MF:C32H36N5NaO3, MW:561.6 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Workflow Visualization: From Glycoprotein to Analysis

The following diagram summarizes the core pathway and decision points in released N-glycan analysis.

The core principles of enzymatic release and fluorescent labeling form the foundation of robust N-glycan analysis. While PNGase F remains the gold standard for release, the choice of fluorescent label is application-dependent. 2-AB is a well-established choice for standard HILIC profiling, 2-AA offers superior versatility for negative-mode MS and CE, and APTS is optimal for high-resolution CE separations. Emerging labels like Procainamide and RapiFluor-MS demonstrate that sensitivity demands are pushing innovation, with the latter offering significant gains in MS sensitivity and throughput.

The ongoing evolution of tags and platforms, including high-throughput MALDI-TOF-MS methods [14], continues to enhance our ability to decipher the complex language of glycosylation. This is paramount for advancing biomedical research and ensuring the quality and efficacy of next-generation biopharmaceuticals.

The analysis of complex biological molecules, particularly glycans and polar metabolites, is a cornerstone of modern biopharmaceutical development and life science research. The separation of these analytes relies on distinct chromatographic and electrophoretic mechanisms that exploit different physicochemical properties. Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography (HILIC) operates through a combination of hydrophilic partitioning, hydrogen bonding, and electrostatic interactions, where analytes are retained on a polar stationary phase using a mobile phase with high organic solvent content (typically >70% acetonitrile). Separation occurs in order of increasing polarity, with the least polar compounds eluting first [15]. Capillary Electrophoresis (CE) separates ions based on their electrophoretic mobility in a conductive buffer under the influence of an electric field, with separation efficiency largely dependent on the analyte's charge and size. Mass Spectrometry (MS) is not a separation technique per se but an detection method that separates gas-phase ions based on their mass-to-charge ratio (m/z), providing structural information through fragmentation patterns. Porous Graphitic Carbon (PGC) offers a unique separation mechanism based on both hydrophobic and polar interactions, with a highly ordered, flat graphite surface that facilitates exceptional isomer separation capabilities through electron donor-acceptor interactions [16].

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Analytical Separation Platforms

Platform	Primary Separation Mechanism	Optimal Application Range	Key Strengths
HILIC	Hydrophilic partitioning, hydrogen bonding, ion-exchange	Polar compounds, glycans, metabolites	Orthogonal to RPLC, MS compatibility, high sensitivity in ESI-MS
CE	Electrophoretic mobility (charge/size ratio)	Charged molecules, glycan isomers, glycopeptides	High efficiency, minimal sample consumption, rapid method development
PGC	Hydrophobic and polar interactions, electron donor-acceptor	Glycan isomers, native glycans, polar compounds	Superior isomer separation, chemical stability, wide pH tolerance
MS	Mass-to-charge ratio (m/z)	Structural characterization, quantification	High specificity, structural elucidation, wide dynamic range

Comparative Performance in Glycan Analysis

Method Performance and Metrics

When applied specifically to glycan analysis, each platform demonstrates distinct performance characteristics. A comprehensive comparison of seven separation methods for Fc-glycosylation profiling of an IgG biopharmaceutical revealed that while all methods showed excellent precision and accuracy, significant differences emerged in their ability to detect and quantitate minor glycan species, particularly sialylated glycans [3]. HILIC-based methods, especially HILIC-UPLC of 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB)-labeled glycans, has emerged as a reference method in many pharmaceutical applications due to its robust performance characteristics [3] [17].

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Comparison of Glycan Analysis Methods

Method	Precision (RSD%)	Sample Requirement	Analysis Time	Isomer Separation	Throughput
HILIC-UPLC (2-AB)	<5% [3]	~40 μg [17]	Several hours to days [17]	Moderate	Moderate
CE-LIF	<5% [3]	Low (microscale)	~30 minutes	High	High
PGC-LC-MS	N/A	Low (microscale)	~60 minutes	Excellent [16]	Moderate
Rapid 2-AB	Comparable to conventional [17]	~40 μg [17]	<1 day [17]	Moderate	High
Reduction LC-MS	Comparable to conventional [17]	~50 μg	Minutes [17]	Low	High

Application-Specific Performance

Recent advancements in HILIC methodologies have demonstrated particular utility in specific application contexts. The development of a HILIC-MALDI-MSI platform for quantitative N-glycan analysis showed minimized ion suppression and provided higher N-glycan coverage as well as better quantitation accuracy compared to direct MALDI-MS analysis [18]. Meanwhile, PGC-LC-MS has demonstrated superior capabilities in resolving glycan isomers and anomers, significantly reducing co-elution issues that plague other separation mechanisms [16]. For high-throughput applications, CE-based methods employing laser-induced fluorescence detection (CE-LIF) have shown exceptional performance in rapid screening environments where sample quantity is limited and high analytical efficiency is required [3].

Experimental Protocols and Workflows

Standard HILIC-UPLC Protocol for N-Glycan Analysis

The conventional 2-AB HILIC-UPLC method represents a gold standard approach for comprehensive N-glycan profiling [3] [17]. The workflow begins with enzymatic release of glycans from the protein backbone using Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) incubation, typically performed at 37°C for 18 hours [18]. Released glycans are then purified and labeled with the fluorescent tag 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) via reductive amination. The labeled glycans are subsequently separated using a HILIC-UPLC system with a stationary phase such as a bridged ethyl hybrid (BEH) amide column and a mobile phase gradient starting from high organic content (typically 70-85% acetonitrile) to increasing aqueous content. Detection is achieved through fluorescence detection with excitation at 330 nm and emission at 420 nm, providing sensitive and quantitative glycan profiling data [3] [17].

Advanced GlycanDIA Workflow with PGC Separation

The recently developed GlycanDIA workflow integrates PGC separation with advanced mass spectrometry for comprehensive glycomic analysis [16]. The protocol begins with the release of N-glycans from protein or RNA samples using PNGase F. The native glycans are then separated using a PGC nanoflow LC column with a gradient from Mobile Phase A (10 mM ammonium acetate in water, pH 4.7) to Mobile Phase B (100% acetonitrile) at flow rates of 0.3-1.0 μL/min [18] [16]. The eluted glycans are analyzed using a tandem mass spectrometer operating in data-independent acquisition (DIA) mode with staggered windows (24 m/z) covering a mass range of 600-1800 m/z. Fragmentation is performed using higher energy collisional dissociation (HCD) with normalized collision energy optimized at 20% to balance sequence information retention and fragmentation efficiency [16]. Data processing is conducted using the GlycanDIA Finder search engine with iterative decoy searching for confident glycan identification.

Rapid CE-LIF Method for High-Throughput Screening

For applications requiring rapid analysis of large sample sets, such as clone screening during cell line development, CE-LIF methods provide an efficient alternative [3]. The protocol involves glycan release with PNGase F followed by labeling with charged fluorophores such as 8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid (APTS). The labeled glycans are then separated in a capillary electrophoresis system using a carbohydrate separation matrix under reversed polarity with laser-induced fluorescence detection. This approach enables complete analysis in approximately 30 minutes per sample with exceptional separation efficiency, particularly for isomeric glycans [3].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of these analytical platforms requires specific reagents and materials optimized for each methodology. The selection of appropriate consumables and reagents is critical for obtaining reliable and reproducible results.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Glycan Analysis

Item	Function/Application	Key Considerations
PNGase F	Enzymatic release of N-glycans from proteins	Enzyme purity and activity critical for complete release [18]
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent labeling for HILIC detection	High labeling efficiency essential for quantification [3]
APTS (8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid)	Fluorescent labeling for CE-LIF	Charged fluorophore enables electrophoretic separation [3]
Ammonium acetate/formate	Mobile phase additives for HILIC and PGC	Volatile salts compatible with MS detection [18] [19]
PGC Columns	Stationary phase for glycan isomer separation	Exceptional chemical stability and separation efficiency [16]
HILIC Columns	Stationary phase for polar compound separation	Various chemistries available (amide, zwitterionic, silica) [15] [19]
FR179642	Pneumocandin M1|	Pneumocandin M1 is a reagent for antifungal research. This product is For Research Use Only (RUO). Not for diagnostic or therapeutic use.
ATP ditromethamine	ATP ditromethamine, CAS:102047-34-7, MF:C18H38N7O19P3, MW:749.5 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Platform Selection Guide

The choice of analytical platform depends heavily on the specific research questions, sample characteristics, and operational constraints. The following decision pathway provides guidance for selecting the most appropriate methodology:

The analytical platforms of HILIC, CE, MS, and PGC each offer distinct advantages for glycan analysis and the separation of polar compounds. HILIC provides robust, MS-compatible separation orthogonal to reversed-phase chromatography, with particular strength in standardized pharmaceutical applications. CE offers exceptional efficiency and speed for high-throughput screening environments. PGC delivers superior isomer separation capabilities essential for detailed structural characterization. MS detection provides the specificity and sensitivity required for comprehensive glycan profiling and quantification. The optimal selection of analytical platform depends on the specific research objectives, with the emerging trend focusing on multidimensional approaches that combine the strengths of multiple separation mechanisms to address the complex analytical challenges presented by modern biopharmaceutical characterization and glycoscience research.

Table of Contents

• Introduction: The Critical Need for Glycan Profiling
• The Analytical Principle: How HILIC-UPLC Works
• Head-to-Head: HILIC-UPLC Versus Other Glycan Analysis Techniques
• Inside the Laboratory: Standard HILIC-UPLC Experimental Protocol
• Essential Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions for HILIC-UPLC
• Conclusion: The Unrivaled Position of HILIC-UPLC in Biopharma

Glycosylation is a fundamental post-translational modification that profoundly influences the safety, efficacy, and stability of protein-based therapeutics. For monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), which constitute a dominant class of biopharmaceuticals, N-glycan profiles are considered Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) by regulatory agencies, directly impacting mechanisms such as antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) [17]. The analysis of these complex glycan structures presents a significant analytical challenge due to their structural diversity, isomeric forms, and hydrophilic nature. Among the techniques available, Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography coupled with Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HILIC-UPLC) has emerged as a widely accepted reference method. This guide provides an objective comparison of HILIC-UPLC's performance against other analytical techniques, underpinned by experimental data and detailed methodologies, to delineate its role as the gold standard in glycan profiling for drug development.

The Analytical Principle: How HILIC-UPLC Works

HILIC-UPLC operates on a separation mechanism that is uniquely suited to the analysis of polar compounds like glycans. The technique employs a polar stationary phase (such as bridged ethyl hybrid (BEH) silica with amide or other bonded phases) and a mobile phase typically consisting of a high concentration (often >60-70%) of an organic solvent, like acetonitrile, in a water-miscible buffer.

The retention mechanism is multimodal, involving:

• Hydrophilic Partitioning: A water-enriched layer is formed on the surface of the polar stationary phase. Analytes partition between this layer and the organic-rich mobile phase, with more hydrophilic glycans retaining longer [20].
• Ion-Exchange: Charged groups on the analyte and the stationary phase can interact, contributing to retention. This is particularly relevant for separating sialylated glycans which carry negative charge [20].
• Adsorption: Direct hydrogen bonding can occur between the glycan and the stationary phase [20].

The "UPLC" aspect refers to the use of columns packed with very small particles (e.g., 1.7 µm) and systems capable of operating at high pressures, which dramatically enhances resolution, sensitivity, and speed compared to traditional HPLC [21]. When glycans are labelled with a fluorescent tag like 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB), the combination provides a powerful tool for high-resolution relative quantification.

Head-to-Head: HILIC-UPLC Versus Other Glycan Analysis Techniques

To objectively assess HILIC-UPLC's status, its performance must be compared against other prominent glycan analysis methods. The following table summarizes key performance metrics from published studies.

Table 1: Quantitative Performance Comparison of Glycan Profiling Techniques

Analytical Method	Key Performance Metrics	Sample Requirement	Analysis Time per Sample	Major Advantages	Major Limitations
HILIC-UPLC (2-AB labelled)	High resolution of isomers [21]; Excellent reproducibility (CVs typically <5%) [21]	~40 µg [17]	~20-60 min [21]	High resolution; Excellent quantification; Orthogonal to MS; Robust & reproducible	Isomeric identification relies on standards; Less structural detail than MS
MALDI-TOF-MS	High speed; CV ~10% with internal standard [14]	Micrograms [14]	Minutes for MS acquisition [14]	Extremely high-throughput; Mass identification	Quantitative challenges without internal standard; Limited isomer separation; Ion suppression
RPIP-UPLC-MS	High sensitivity for heparin/HS disaccharides [22]	"small amounts" [22]	~5 min for heparin analysis [22]	Excellent for charged GAGs; Structural information	Complex method development; Requires ion-pairing reagents
Capillary Gel Electrophoresis (CGE)	High speed and resolution [23]	Information missing	<1 min [24]	Very fast separation; High throughput	Limited peak capacity compared to 2D-LC
2D-LC-MS (Intact/Subunit)	Identifies paired glycoforms; High specificity [17]	Low microgram [17]	~30 min [17]	Direct glycoform characterization; No sample digestion	Higher instrument complexity; Data analysis can be complex

The data reveals that HILIC-UPLC occupies a unique niche. While MALDI-TOF-MS offers unparalleled throughput for screening hundreds of samples, with one study demonstrating analysis of 192 samples in a single experiment [14], it traditionally struggles with quantitative accuracy and isomer separation without sophisticated internal standard methods [14] [24]. In contrast, HILIC-UPLC provides robust, high-resolution separation of isomeric structures, such as the two isomers of G1F in monoclonal antibodies or disialylated biantennary glycans from bovine fetuin [21]. This reliable quantification and resolution makes it the preferred method for definitive characterization and lot-release testing.

In comparison to other LC-MS methods, HILIC-UPLC offers a more straightforward path for routine glycan profiling than Ion-Pairing Reverse-Phase (RPIP) methods, which, while powerful for glycosaminoglycan (GAG) analysis, require complex optimization of ion-pairing reagents that can suppress MS signal and contaminate instrumentation [22] [20]. The high-resolution separation of HILIC also provides a complementary dimension to mass spectrometry, often used in two-dimensional platforms to deeply characterize complex samples [23].

Inside the Laboratory: Standard HILIC-UPLC Experimental Protocol

The following workflow details a standard protocol for N-glycan profiling of a monoclonal antibody using the 2-AB labelling method and HILIC-UPLC analysis, as derived from established methodologies [17] [21].

• Sample Preparation (Denaturation & Reduction): A 40 µg aliquot of the mAb (at ~2 mg/mL) is buffer-exchanged or diluted in a neutral buffer like PBS. The sample is then denatured using a reagent like 8M guanidine hydrochloride and reduced using dithiothreitol (DTT) or tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP) to break inter-chain disulfide bonds [17].
• Enzymatic Release of N-Glycans: The denatured/reduced protein is incubated with the enzyme Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) in a suitable buffer (e.g., ammonium bicarbonate) at 37°C for several hours. PNGase F cleaves the N-glycans from the protein backbone, releasing them as free oligosaccharides [17].
• Fluorescent Labelling with 2-AB: The released glycans are labelled with the fluorophore 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) via reductive amination. This step is critical for sensitive fluorescent detection and occurs in a reaction mixture containing 2-AB and a reducing agent like sodium cyanoborohydride [21].
• Purification of Labelled Glycans: Excess fluorescent dye is removed from the labelled glycans using solid-phase extraction (SPE), typically with hydrophilic interaction (HILIC) media packed in a microplate or spin columns. The glycans, being hydrophilic, are retained while unincorporated dye is washed away. The purified glycans are then eluted in a high-water-content solvent [14] [17].
• HILIC-UPLC Analysis:
  • Column: ACQUITY UPLC BEH Glycan, 1.7 µm, 2.1 x 150 mm (or equivalent) [21].
  • Mobile Phase: (A) 50-100 mM ammonium formate, pH 4.5; (B) Acetonitrile [21].
  • Gradient: A linear gradient from, for example, 75% B to 50-60% B over 45-60 minutes [21].
  • Temperature: 60 °C [21].
  • Detection: Fluorescence (Ex: 330 nm, Em: 420 nm for 2-AB).
• Data Analysis: Glycans are identified by comparing their retention times to an external standard of known glycan structures (a glycan library). Relative quantification is achieved by integrating the peak areas, as the fluorescence response is considered relatively uniform across different glycan structures.

HILIC-UPLC N-Glycan Analysis Workflow

Essential Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions for HILIC-UPLC

Successful execution of the HILIC-UPLC glycan profiling method requires specific reagents and instruments. The following table lists the essential components.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for HILIC-UPLC Glycan Analysis

Item Name	Function/Description	Critical Parameters
PNGase F Enzyme	Enzyme that releases N-linked glycans from glycoproteins by cleaving the bond between asparagine and the core GlcNAc.	High purity and activity to ensure complete deglycosylation.
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent dye that labels the reducing end of released glycans via reductive amination.	Labelling efficiency and purity; requires removal of excess dye post-reaction.
HILIC Purification Media	Solid-phase extraction material (e.g., microcrystalline cellulose, Sepharose beads) to purify labelled glycans.	High binding capacity for hydrophilic glycans; compatibility with 96-well plate formats for throughput [14].
ACQUITY UPLC BEH Glycan Column	The analytical column packed with 1.7 µm bridged ethyl hybrid (BEH) particles with a proprietary stationary phase.	Column chemistry optimized for high-resolution glycan separation; stable at high pressures and elevated temperatures [21].
Ammonium Formate Buffer	A volatile buffer salt used in the mobile phase to control pH and ionic strength.	High purity; prepared at pH ~4.5 to optimize separation and MS-compatibility if used.
Glycan Library Standards	A prepared mixture of 2-AB labelled glycans with known structures.	Serves as a system suitability test and for calibrating retention times for identification [21].
cis-Burchellin	2-Epi-3a-epiburchellin|CAS 57457-99-5|RUO	High-purity 2-Epi-3a-epiburchellin, a neolignan for phytochemical and biomimetic synthesis research. For Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.
Neoeuonymine	Neoeuonymine, MF:C36H45NO17, MW:763.7 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

The collective data and comparisons solidify HILIC-UPLC's position as the gold standard reference method for glycan profiling in the biopharmaceutical industry. Its strengths—high resolution for separating isomers, robust and reproducible quantification, and well-understood methodology—make it an indispensable tool for characterizing and controlling the quality of therapeutic proteins. While emerging high-throughput techniques like MALDI-TOF-MS and rapid 2D-LC-MS are invaluable for specific applications like clone screening and in-depth characterization, HILIC-UPLC remains the benchmark for definitive analysis. Its role in ensuring batch-to-batch consistency, demonstrating biosimilarity to reference products, and complying with regulatory standards ensures that HILIC-UPLC will continue to be a cornerstone of biopharmaceutical development for the foreseeable future.

A Practical Guide to Glycan Analysis Methods: From HILIC-UPLC and CE-LIF to Advanced MS Workflows

Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography coupled with Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography and Fluorescence Detection (HILIC-UPLC/FLD) represents a cornerstone technique for the detailed analysis of released N-glycans from therapeutic glycoproteins like monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Within the biopharmaceutical industry, glycosylation profiling is a critical quality attribute (CQA) that must be thoroughly monitored due to its significant impact on drug efficacy, stability, and immunogenicity [25]. The HILIC-UPLC/FLD method provides a robust, high-resolution platform for separating glycans based on both their size and composition, culminating in the generation of Glucose Unit (GU) values—a standardized metric that enables reliable inter-laboratory comparison and preliminary structural assignment [26] [7]. This guide will objectively detail the complete workflow from fluorescent labeling with 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) to final GU value determination, while comparing its performance against emerging alternative methodologies.

Experimental Protocols and Workflows

Core HILIC-UPLC/FLD Workflow: From 2-AB Labeling to GU Values

The standard HILIC-UPLC/FLD workflow is a multi-step process that transforms glycoproteins into quantitatively analyzed glycan profiles. The following diagram illustrates this workflow, highlighting the key stages from sample preparation to data analysis:

Sample Preparation and N-Glycan Release

The initial phase involves preparing the glycoprotein sample for efficient glycan release. The protein is first denatured using surfactants like Rapigest and reduced with dithiothreitol (DTT) at 60°C for 30 minutes, followed by alkylation with iodoacetamide (IAA) to prevent disulfide bond reformation [25]. The denatured glycoprotein is then incubated with Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) enzyme, which specifically cleaves the N-glycosidic bond between the innermost GlcNAc and asparagine residue, thereby releasing the intact N-glycans [27] [28]. This enzymatic deglycosylation typically occurs over 18 hours at 37°C, although newer rapid release protocols can complete this step in just 5 minutes at 50°C [29].

2-AB Fluorescent Labeling and Clean-up

The released glycans are subsequently labeled with 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) through reductive amination. This reaction involves incubating the glycans with 2-AB dye dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) containing acetic acid and sodium cyanoborohydride at 65°C for 3 hours in the dark [25]. The stoichiometric attachment of one 2-AB molecule per glycan enables highly sensitive fluorescence detection without altering the glycan's hydrodynamic volume, which is crucial for accurate separation profiling [30] [7]. Following labeling, excess dye is removed using HILIC-based solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridges, where glycans are retained on the cartridge while unincorporated dye is washed away [28]. The purified 2-AB-labeled glycans are then eluted and prepared for chromatographic analysis.

HILIC-UPLC Separation and Fluorescence Detection

The separation of 2-AB-labeled glycans employs HILIC chemistry on UPLC systems, which provides superior resolution compared to conventional HPLC. The HILIC mechanism separates glycans based on their hydrophilic interactions with a stationary phase, effectively resolving them by size, composition, and branching structure [30] [7]. Smaller, less complex glycans elute later, while larger, more complex structures with higher hydrodynamic volume elute earlier. Fluorescence detection (FLD) is then used with typical excitation/emission wavelengths optimized for the 2-AB fluorophore, providing highly sensitive and quantitative detection of the separated glycan species [25] [30].

Glucose Unit (GU) Value Determination

A critical final step involves converting retention times to standardized Glucose Unit (GU) values. This is achieved by running a dextrin ladder (a mixture of glucose polymers) as an internal standard and plotting the log of the retention times against the known glucose unit values [26]. The resulting calibration curve enables the conversion of each glycan's retention time to a GU value, which is reproducible across different instruments and laboratories [26] [7]. These GU values serve as a foundational reference for preliminary glycan identification when compared to databases of known glycan standards with established GU values [26] [30].

Comparison Methodologies

HILIC-MS Middle-Up Approach

An emerging alternative to the released glycan method involves HILIC-MS analysis at the protein subunit level (middle-up approach). This workflow begins with enzymatic digestion of mAbs using IdeS protease to generate Fc/2 and Fab subunits, followed by chemical reduction of disulfide bonds—a process requiring approximately 1 hour [25]. The subunits are then separated using wide-pore (300 Å) HILIC stationary phases, which resolve glycoforms before introduction to ESI-MS. This approach provides simultaneous information on glycosylation profiles and other post-translational modifications, enabling its potential use as a multi-attribute monitoring method (MAM) [25].

Capillary Electrophoresis with Laser-Induced Fluorescence (CE-LIF)

Capillary Zone Electrophoresis (CZE) represents another orthogonal separation technique for glycan analysis. In this method, glycans are labeled with charged fluorophores like 8-Aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid (APTS) and separated based on their charge-to-size ratios in a capillary under an electric field [31]. Similar to HILIC, GU values can be computed in CZE using a maltodextrin ladder and a numerical approximation algorithm to normalize migration times, facilitating method standardization and inter-laboratory comparisons [31].

Performance Comparison and Experimental Data

Quantitative Comparison of Glycan Analysis Methods

The following table summarizes key performance metrics for HILIC-UPLC/FLD and its primary alternatives, based on experimental data from recent literature:

Table 1: Comprehensive Comparison of Glycan Analysis Methodologies

Method Attribute	HILIC-UPLC/FLD (2-AB)	Middle-Up HILIC-MS	Capillary Electrophoresis (CE-LIF)
Total Sample Preparation Time	~24 hours (including overnight release) [25]	~1 hour (subunit generation) [25]	Several hours (varies by protocol)
Labeling Reaction Time	3 hours at 65°C [25]	Not required	Varies by fluorophore (typically 1-3 hours)
Analytical Cycle Time	Varies by method (typically 20-60 min)	<7 minutes for subunit separation [25]	Rapid separation (minutes) [31]
Detection Method	Fluorescence (FLD)	Mass Spectrometry (MS)	Laser-Induced Fluorescence (LIF)
Quantitation Approach	Relative fluorescence intensity	Relative abundance from MS signal intensity	Relative fluorescence intensity
Glycan Identification Basis	GU values + exoglycosidase sequencing [30]	Mass measurement + retention time [25]	Migration time + glucose unit values [31]
Site-Specific Information	No	Yes (subunit level) [25]	No
Capacity for PTM Detection	Limited to glycan structures	Comprehensive (multiple PTMs) [25]	Limited to glycan structures
Relative Quantitation Accuracy	High (validated against RFMS) [25]	High (correlates with released methods) [25]	High (comparable to HPLC methods)
Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility	High (with GU normalization) [26]	Under evaluation	Moderate to high (with GU calibration) [31]

Experimental Data Supporting Comparative Performance

Recent studies have directly compared the quantitative performance of HILIC-UPLC/FLD with emerging methodologies. Research examining the middle-up HILIC-MS approach demonstrated excellent correlation with reference released glycan methods when analyzing adalimumab, with relative quantitation of major glycoforms (G0F, G1F, G2F) showing differences of less than 2% between the techniques [25]. This level of agreement validates the middle-up approach as a viable alternative for rapid profiling while providing additional structural information.

The robustness of GU values for inter-laboratory comparisons was systematically investigated in a 2021 study, which found that GUI calibration using dextrin ladders effectively normalized retention time variations across different LC-MS systems, with reported GU values for standard glycans showing minimal deviation (<0.5 GU) between laboratories [26]. This reproducibility underscores the continuing utility of GU values as a standardizing metric in glycan analysis, regardless of the specific separation platform employed.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of the HILIC-UPLC/FLD workflow requires specific, high-quality reagents and materials. The following table details the essential components of the "Scientist's Toolkit" for this methodology:

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for HILIC-UPLC/FLD Glycan Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function/Purpose	Example Specifications
PNGase F Enzyme	Enzymatic release of N-glycans from glycoproteins	Recombinant form, specific activity >50,000 U/mL [28]
2-AB Labeling Kit	Fluorescent tagging of released glycans	Contains 2-AB dye, picoline borane reductant, DMSO, acetic acid [32] [28]
HILIC-SPE Cartridges	Purification of labeled glycans; removal of excess dye	96-well format plates with hydrophilic functional groups [25] [28]
UPLC HILIC Column	Chromatographic separation of labeled glycans	1.7µm BEH particles, 150mm length [25]
Dextrin Ladder Standard	GU value calibration	2-AB labeled glucose homopolymer (DP1-20+) [26] [28]
Glycan Standards	System suitability testing and peak identification	Characterized 2-AB labeled N-glycans (e.g., G0, G1, G2, Man5) [30] [7]
IgG Control Standard	Process control	Human IgG glycoprotein standard [28]
Mobile Phase Additives	Chromatographic separation	LC-MS grade ACN, ammonium formate, formic acid [25]

The HILIC-UPLC/FLD workflow with 2-AB labeling represents a well-validated, robust approach for glycan analysis that continues to serve as the reference method in biopharmaceutical characterization. Its strengths lie in excellent quantitative performance, high reproducibility through GU value standardization, and widespread establishment in regulatory environments. However, emerging techniques like middle-up HILIC-MS offer compelling advantages in speed, additional structural information, and capacity for multi-attribute monitoring. The choice between these methodologies ultimately depends on the specific application requirements, with HILIC-UPLC/FLD remaining the gold standard for dedicated glycan profiling and newer approaches providing complementary capabilities for more comprehensive characterization of therapeutic glycoproteins.

Capillary Electrophoresis with Laser-Induced Fluorescence (CE-LIF) using 8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid (APTS) labeling represents a powerful analytical platform for glycosylation analysis of therapeutic proteins. This technique has gained significant traction in biopharmaceutical development due to its exceptional sensitivity, high-resolution capabilities, and suitability for high-throughput screening applications. Glycosylation is a critical quality attribute of therapeutic antibodies that profoundly impacts efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics, making robust analytical methods essential for comprehensive characterization [3] [33].

The DSA-FACE (DNA-sequencer-aided fluorophore-assisted carbohydrate electrophoresis) methodology leverages multiplexing capillary gel electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection to achieve exceptional throughput for glycan screening applications [3]. When positioned within the broader context of glycoanalysis techniques, CE-LIF methods occupy a distinctive niche that balances analytical performance with practical efficiency. Compared to liquid chromatography-based approaches like HILIC-UPLC, CE-LIF with APTS labeling offers complementary separation mechanics that can resolve challenging glycan isomers while requiring minimal sample material and providing exceptional detection sensitivity [34] [35].

Experimental Protocols and Workflow

Standardized Sample Preparation Protocol

The analytical process begins with the enzymatic release of N-glycans from the glycoprotein using PNGase F under denaturing conditions. Typically, 2 mg of glycoprotein is dissolved in 50 mM phosphate buffer (pH 7.5) with added SDS and 2-mercaptoethanol, followed by incubation at 100°C for 10 minutes. After cooling, Triton X-100 is added to neutralize the SDS, followed by PNGase F addition (1 U) and overnight incubation at 37°C [36]. The released glycans are then separated from deglycosylated proteins through ethanol precipitation by adding 300 μL of ice-cold ethanol to the digestion mixture, followed by centrifugation at 11,000 g for 20 minutes [36].

For APTS labeling, the dried glycan samples are combined with APTS solution (in 1.2 M citric acid or 15% acetic acid) and sodium cyanoborohydride (1 M in THF). The mixture is incubated at 55°C for 50-60 minutes [36]. Under these optimized conditions using citric acid catalyst, a significantly reduced molar ratio of glycan to fluorophore (1:10 versus typical 1:≥100) maintains >95% derivatization yield while minimizing terminal sialic acid loss [36]. After the reaction is stopped by dilution with HPLC water, the labeled glycans may be purified using normal-phase polyamide resin pipette tips to remove excess APTS, though this step is optional for many CE-LIF applications [36] [37].

Instrumental Analysis Conditions

For CE-LIF analysis, the standard configuration utilizes a capillary electrophoresis system equipped with a laser-induced fluorescence detector using a 488 nm excitation source. The separation typically employs a polyvinyl alcohol (PVA)-coated capillary with 50 μm internal diameter and 50-60 cm total length (40-50 cm effective length) [36] [37]. The background electrolyte consists of 15-30 mM acetate buffer (pH 4.2-4.75) sometimes supplemented with hydroxypropyl-methylcellulose as a sieving matrix [36] [37].

Instrument parameters are typically set with capillary temperature at 10-20°C, sample compartment at 20°C, and application of reversed polarity at 16.8-30 kV for separation [36] [37]. Injection is performed using pressure (0.5 psi for 10 seconds) or electrokinetically. The DSA-FACE variant utilizes a DNA analyzer platform (e.g., Applied Biosystems ABI 3730xl) with multiplexing capabilities for enhanced throughput [3].

Figure 1: CE-LIF with APTS Labeling Workflow. The process involves sequential steps from glycan release to data analysis, with key transformations at each stage.

Performance Comparison with Alternative Methods

Quantitative Method Comparison Data

Table 1: Comparative Performance of Glycan Analysis Techniques

Method	Precision	Accuracy	Throughput	Sialic Acid Detection	Key Advantages	Key Limitations
CE-LIF(APTS)	Excellent [3]	Excellent [3]	High [3] [37]	Good [3]	Excellent for neutral glycans; no cleanup needed; high sensitivity [33] [37]	May underestimate high-mannose glycans; co-migration issues with sialylated tetraantennary glycans [33] [37]
DSA-FACE(APTS)	Excellent [3]	Excellent [3]	Very High [3]	Good [3]	Multiplexing capability; exceptional throughput [3]	Limited peak capacity compared to UPLC; specialized instrumentation [3]
HILIC-UPLC(2-AB)	Excellent [3]	Excellent [3]	High [33]	Excellent [3] [33]	Superior peak resolution; better detection of sialylated and tetraantennary glycans [3] [33]	Requires dye removal; longer run times; less sensitive than LIF [33] [37]
HPAEC-PAD	Excellent [3]	Excellent [3]	Moderate [3]	Good [3]	Label-free detection; good for sialic acids [3]	Requires specialized instrumentation; potential degradation at high pH [3]

Complementary Technical Attributes

The orthogonal separation mechanisms of CE versus HILIC provide complementary advantages in comprehensive glycan profiling. While HILIC-UPLC demonstrates superior separation of high-mannose glycans (Man6, Man7, Man8, Man9) and improved detection of sialylated tetraantennary structures, CE-LIF offers exceptional resolution for neutral glycans and isomers with comparable precision and accuracy for major glycan species [3] [34] [33]. The quantification of specific glycan classes varies between platforms, with HILIC-UPLC detecting tetra-antennary acidic fucosylated and afucosylated glycans with relative abundance up to 25% that were not detected by CE-LIF in some applications [33].

For high-mannose glycans, traditional APTS labeling conditions demonstrated variable labeling efficiency, with Man5 and other high-mannose species showing approximately 2-4% lower recovery compared to complex-type glycans in CE-LIF analysis relative to 2-AB labeled RP-HPLC [37]. This highlights the importance of method-specific calibration when absolute quantification of specific glycan classes is required.

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Reagents and Materials for CE-LIF Glycan Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function	Application Notes
APTS Fluorophore	Fluorescent labeling of reduced glycans	Industry standard for CE-LIF; strong negative charge enhances separation; 488 nm excitation [36] [37]
PNGase F	Enzymatic release of N-linked glycans	Requires protein denaturation with SDS/mercaptoethanol; typically performed at 37°C overnight [36]
PVA-coated Capillaries	Separation channel for CE	50 μm internal diameter; 50-60 cm length; minimizes analyte adsorption [36] [37]
Acetate Buffer (pH 4.2-4.75)	Background electrolyte	Acidic pH provides appropriate charge and separation conditions [36]
Sodium Cyanoborohydride	Reducing agent for reductive amination	Stabilizes Schiff base formation in labeling reaction; typically 1M in THF [36]
Citric Acid	Acid catalyst for labeling	Enables faster labeling (50-60 min at 55°C) vs. acetic acid; reduces APTS requirement [36]
APTS-labeled Glycan Standards	Migration reference standards	Essential for peak identification and method qualification [38]

Applications in Biopharmaceutical Development

Quality Attribute Monitoring

The glycosylation profile of therapeutic antibodies represents a critical quality attribute requiring careful monitoring throughout bioprocess development and manufacturing. CE-LIF with APTS labeling provides the analytical capability to track important glycosylation features including afucosylation (which enhances antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity), galactosylation (which affects complement-dependent cytotoxicity), and sialylation (which modulates anti-inflammatory activity and serum half-life) [3] [33]. The high precision and accuracy demonstrated by CE-LIF methods make them suitable for detecting subtle glycosylation changes in response to process parameters [3].

For high-throughput screening applications during cell line development or process optimization, the DSA-FACE platform offers exceptional efficiency by leveraging multiplexed capillary systems originally developed for DNA sequencing [3]. This enables rapid analysis of hundreds of samples with minimal manual intervention, providing critical decision-support data for bioprocess development.

Addressing Analytical Challenges

The analysis of sialylated glycans presents particular challenges across all analytical platforms. For CE-LIF methods, sialylated tetraantennary N-glycans may co-migrate with excess dye or system peaks, potentially complicating their accurate quantification [33]. The use of citric acid catalyst in the APTS labeling reaction at 55°C provides a solution to minimize terminal sialic acid loss during derivatization while maintaining efficient labeling kinetics [36]. For comprehensive analysis of complex glycan mixtures, many laboratories employ orthogonal methods such as HILIC-UPLC to complement CE-LIF data, particularly for sialylated species [3] [33].

Figure 2: Method Selection Decision Pathway. A strategic approach to selecting appropriate glycan analysis methods based on research objectives and sample characteristics.

CE-LIF with APTS labeling, particularly in the DSA-FACE configuration, represents a robust, precise, and efficient platform for glycan analysis in biopharmaceutical development. While HILIC-UPLC demonstrates advantages for specific applications such as sialylated glycan analysis and high-mannose separation, CE-LIF methods provide complementary benefits including exceptional sensitivity, minimal sample requirements, and superior throughput capabilities. The optimized APTS labeling protocols using citric acid catalyst have addressed earlier limitations with sialic acid retention and labeling efficiency, further enhancing the method's reliability. Within the broader context of glycoanalysis techniques, CE-LIF with APTS labeling occupies a critical niche that balances analytical performance with practical efficiency, making it an indispensable tool for comprehensive characterization of therapeutic glycoproteins.

Protein glycosylation is a critical post-translational modification that profoundly influences the safety, efficacy, and stability of biopharmaceuticals, making accurate analysis essential during development and quality control [3] [39]. Mass spectrometry (MS) has emerged as the cornerstone technology for characterizing these complex glycan structures, with several distinct but complementary approaches available. Released glycan analysis using Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography coupled to Mass Spectrometry (HILIC-MS), glycopeptide analysis via the Multi-Attribute Method (MAM), and intact mass analysis each provide unique insights into glycosylation patterns. This guide objectively compares these three principal MS-based approaches, providing experimental data, detailed methodologies, and practical resources to inform method selection for therapeutic protein development.

The three primary MS approaches for glycan analysis offer different levels of structural information, throughput, and operational complexity, making them suitable for distinct applications within the biopharmaceutical development workflow.

• Released Glycan Analysis (HILIC-MS): This method involves enzymatically releasing N-glycans from the protein backbone, fluorescently labeling them, and separating them via HILIC chromatography before MS detection. It provides detailed, quantitative information about glycan composition and abundance but loses specific attachment site information [3] [40].
• Glycopeptide Analysis (MAM): This LC-MS/MS peptide mapping approach analyzes glycopeptides without removing the glycan, enabling simultaneous identification of the glycosylation site, peptide sequence, and glycan composition in a single assay. MAM can monitor multiple product quality attributes (PQAs) beyond glycosylation, making it a powerful multi-attribute tool for quality control [41] [42].
• Intact Mass Analysis: This method involves analyzing the whole protein or its reduced subunits (light and heavy chains) by LC-MS under native or denaturing conditions. It provides a global overview of the glycoform distribution and can be rapidly deployed to monitor specific critical quality attributes, such as high-mannose content, without the need for extensive sample preparation [39].

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Mass Spectrometry-Based Glycan Analysis Methods

Characteristic	Released Glycan Analysis (HILIC-MS)	Glycopeptide Analysis (MAM)	Intact Mass Analysis
Analytical Target	Released, labeled N-glycans	Tryptic glycopeptides	Intact protein or reduced subunits (LC-MS)
Site-Specific Information	No	Yes	No
Glycan Quantification	Excellent (High precision) [3]	Good (Comparable to HILIC) [41]	Moderate (Relative quantitation of major species) [39]
Throughput	Moderate	Lower (Complex sample prep)	High (Minimal sample prep) [39]
Information Scope	Glycan composition and relative abundance	Multiple PQAs (glycosylation, oxidation, deamidation, etc.) [41]	Overall glycoform profile, including mass variants
Best Suited For	In-depth glycan profiling, product characterization, lot-to-lot comparison	Comprehensive product characterization, quality control for release and stability [41]	Rapid process monitoring, high-throughput screening, monitoring specific CQAs like Man-5 [39]

Detailed Method Comparison

Released Glycan Analysis (HILIC-MS)

Experimental Protocol: The standard workflow for HILIC-MS-based released glycan analysis involves multiple steps. First, N-glycans are enzymatically released from the therapeutic antibody using Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F). The released glycans are then labeled with a fluorescent tag (e.g., 2-aminobenzamide [2-AB] or RapiFluor-MS) to enhance detection sensitivity in both fluorescence and MS [3] [40]. The labeled glycans are separated using a HILIC stationary phase, such as a BEH Amide column. Separation is typically performed with a gradient of organic solvent (e.g., acetonitrile) and an aqueous buffer (e.g., ammonium formate, pH 4.4-4.5). Detection and quantification are achieved through fluorescence and/or mass spectrometry [3] [40].

Performance and Experimental Data: HILIC-based methods are renowned for their excellent precision and accuracy in quantifying major and minor glycan species. A comprehensive comparison study demonstrated that HILIC-UPLC of 2-AB-labeled glycans showed excellent precision and was successfully used as a reference method against which other techniques were benchmarked [3]. Technological advancements in LC systems, such as the use of MaxPeak High Performance Surfaces, have been shown to improve the recovery of metal-sensitive analytes like sialylated glycans by up to three-fold, enhancing the accuracy of quantifying these critical species [40].

Table 2: Quantitative Performance of Released Glycan Analysis via HILIC-UPLC (2-AB)

Performance Metric	Result	Experimental Context
Precision & Accuracy	Excellent	Comparison of 7 non-mass spectrometric methods for Fc-glycosylation profiling of an IgG1 mAb [3]
Difference in Peak Area %	Within 2% (all species); within 0.1% (low abundance)	Method migration comparability study between ACQUITY UPLC H-Class PLUS and Arc Premier systems [40]
Recovery of Sialylated Glycans	Up to 3-fold improvement	Achieved on Arc Premier System with MaxPeak HPS compared to traditional stainless-steel systems [40]

Glycopeptide Analysis (MAM)

Experimental Protocol: The MAM workflow is a bottom-up proteomics approach. The therapeutic protein is first denatured, reduced, and alkylated. It is then digested using a specific protease, most commonly trypsin, to generate peptides and glycopeptides. For higher throughput, digestion times can be shortened significantly (e.g., to 30 minutes) from traditional overnight incubations [41]. The digest is analyzed by LC-HRMS, typically using a reversed-phase column coupled to a high-resolution mass spectrometer (e.g., Orbitrap). Data acquisition is followed by specialized data processing that includes both targeted and non-targeted elements. The targeted processing identifies and quantifies pre-defined PQAs, while the New Peak Detection (NPD) feature compares test samples to a reference to find new or unexpected impurities or modifications [41].

Performance and Experimental Data: MAM has been validated for its ability to simultaneously monitor multiple PQAs, demonstrating performance suitable for quality control environments. A key study validated MAM for monitoring rituximab attributes including deamidation, lysine clipping, and glycosylation, showing that glycan levels quantified by MAM were comparable to those from the traditional HILIC method [41]. The method has been shown to be linear, precise, and accurate, meeting International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) validation criteria [41]. Furthermore, its utility extends across various development stages, including cell line and cell culture process development [42].

Intact Mass Analysis

Experimental Protocol: For intact mass analysis, the sample preparation is minimal. The therapeutic monoclonal antibody is typically partially reduced using a reagent like dithiothreitol (DTT) to separate the light and heavy chains, which simplifies the mass spectrum and allows for more straightforward assignment of glycoforms attached to the Fc region of the heavy chain [39]. The reduced sample is then analyzed by LC-MS using a reversed-phase column (e.g., TSKgel phenyl-5PW RP) coupled to a high-resolution mass spectrometer. The deconvoluted mass spectrum is generated to determine the masses of the different glycoforms, and their relative abundance is calculated based on the ion intensity [39].

Performance and Experimental Data: Intact mass methods are valued for their speed and ability to provide a global view of glycosylation. A validated platform reduced intact mass method was demonstrated to be linear, accurate, specific, and precise for the relative quantitation of mannose-5 (Man-5), a high-mannose glycoform, for both IgG1 and IgG4 mAbs [39]. The method was validated over a range of 0.8–11.0% for IgG1 and 1.0–6.2% for IgG4, making it suitable for monitoring this critical quality attribute, which can impact the in vivo half-life of a therapeutic antibody [39].

Table 3: Validation Data for a Reduced Intact Mass Method for Man-5 Quantitation

Validation Parameter	IgG1 mAb Performance	IgG4 mAb Performance
Quantitation Range	0.8% - 11.0%	1.0% - 6.2%
Linearilty	Demonstrated within range	Demonstrated within range
Precision (Repeatability & Intermediate Precision)	Precise across low, moderate, and high levels	Precise across low, moderate, and high levels
Application	Monitoring high mannose in cell culture and GMP batch testing	Monitoring high mannose in cell culture and GMP batch testing [39]

Workflow Visualization

The following diagrams illustrate the core procedural and data analysis workflows for the three mass spectrometry approaches.

Workflow Comparison of Three Core MS Approaches

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of these glycan analysis methods relies on a suite of specialized reagents, enzymes, and chromatography materials.

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Glycan Analysis

Item	Function / Application	Examples / Notes
PNGase F	Enzyme for releasing N-linked glycans from the protein backbone for HILIC-MS analysis.	Standard enzyme for N-glycan release [3].
Fluorescent Labels	Tags to enhance detection sensitivity for released glycans in HILIC-MS.	2-aminobenzamide (2-AB), RapiFluor-MS [3] [40].
HILIC Columns	Stationary phases for separating released glycans based on hydrophilicity.	Waters XBridge Premier BEH Amide Column [40].
Trypsin	Protease for digesting proteins into peptides/glycopeptides for MAM analysis.	Enables specific cleavage for glycopeptide generation [41] [43].
Reducing Agents	Breaks disulfide bonds for intact mass analysis of subunits (light/heavy chains).	Dithiothreitol (DTT) [39].
RP-LC Columns	Stationary phases for separating peptides (MAM) or intact/reduced proteins (Intact Mass).	TSKgel phenyl-5PW RP for intact mass; C18 for peptides [39].
High-Res Mass Spectrometer	Instrument for accurate mass measurement of glycans, glycopeptides, and intact proteins.	Orbitrap-based instruments (e.g., Q Exactive, Exactive Plus) [41] [39].
TP-680	TP-680, MF:C35H33N5O4S, MW:619.7 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Kadsuric acid	Kadsuric acid, MF:C30H46O4, MW:470.7 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Released glycan analysis (HILIC-MS), glycopeptide analysis (MAM), and intact mass analysis each offer a powerful and distinct approach to characterizing protein glycosylation. The choice of method depends heavily on the specific information required, the stage of product development, and the necessary throughput. HILIC-MS remains the gold standard for detailed, quantitative glycan profiling. In contrast, MAM provides a comprehensive, multi-attribute view that includes site-specific glycosylation and is increasingly suited for quality control. Intact mass analysis serves as a rapid, high-throughput technique for overall glycoform monitoring. By understanding the capabilities, performance, and experimental requirements of each approach, scientists can strategically select and implement the optimal mass spectrometry strategy to ensure the quality, efficacy, and safety of their biopharmaceutical products.

The analysis of complex biological samples, particularly glycans and glycopeptides, presents a significant challenge in biopharmaceutical development and biomedical research. No single liquid chromatography technique can comprehensively resolve the vast dynamic range and structural diversity of these analytes. Within this context, orthogonal separation methods that combine distinct retention mechanisms are indispensable for increasing peak capacity and achieving confident identifications. This guide objectively compares two such techniques—Porous Graphitic Carbon (PGC) and Reversed-Phase (RP) chromatography—highlighting their complementary roles in glycan analysis, especially when framed against the common use of Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography (HILIC). Evidence from comparative studies reveals that the coupling of PGC and RP can significantly enhance metabolome coverage and resolution of isomeric structures, which are critical for detailed characterization in drug development [44] [45].

Fundamental Principles and Separation Mechanisms

The orthogonality between PGC and RP stems from their fundamentally different retention mechanisms, which exploit distinct physicochemical properties of analytes.

• Reversed-Phase (RP) Chromatography: RP separation is primarily based on hydrophobic interactions between non-polar stationary phases (typically C18) and the hydrophobic regions of analytes. For highly hydrophilic native glycans, which show little to no retention on RP columns, a common workaround is derivatization with hydrophobic tags (e.g., through reductive amination, hydrazone formation, or permethylation) to introduce the necessary hydrophobicity for retention [46] [47]. The retentivity of fluorescently labeled glycans on conventional RP columns can be quite low, and the elution order often groups glycans by their structural elements [6].

• Porous Graphitic Carbon (PGC) Chromatography: PGC employs a flat, highly crystalline graphite surface, which leads to a unique retention mechanism described as a combination of dispersive (hydrophobic) interactions and charge-induced interactions with the polarizable graphite surface [48]. This dual mechanism allows PGC to strongly retain polar and ionic species, including native and reduced oligosaccharides, without the need for derivatization [6] [47]. The strong adsorption of polar analytes and remarkable selectivity for isomeric glycans are hallmarks of PGC separation [6].

• HILIC Mechanism (Context): In contrast, HILIC operates through hydrophilic partitioning of analytes into a water-enriched layer on a polar stationary phase, complemented by hydrogen bonding and electrostatic interactions [48]. It is often considered the most orthogonal technique to RP [48].

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of PGC, RP, and HILIC

Feature	Porous Graphitic Carbon (PGC)	Reversed-Phase (RP)	HILIC
Primary Mechanism	Dispersive + charge-induced interactions [48]	Hydrophobic partitioning [47]	Hydrophilic partitioning [48]
Typical Analyte State	Native or reduced glycans [6]	Derivatized glycans (e.g., permethylated, labeled) [46] [47]	Native or derivatized glycans [46]
Derivatization Required	No (optional) [6]	Yes (typically mandatory for retention) [6] [47]	No (optional, often used for detection) [46]
Key Strength	Exceptional isomer separation [49] [6]	High peak capacity and resolution [46]	Strong retention of polar compounds [46]

The following diagram summarizes the core retention mechanisms of PGC, RP, and HILIC, illustrating their fundamental differences.

Comparative Performance Data

Objective comparison of chromatographic performance is key for selecting the appropriate technique. The following table and experimental data synthesize findings from direct comparative studies.

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Comparison for Glycan Analysis

Performance Metric	Porous Graphitic Carbon (PGC)	Reversed-Phase (RP)	HILIC
Isomer Separation	Excellent – Remarkable selectivity for isomeric glycans [6] [47].	Good – Achievable, depends on column, eluents, and run time; particularly effective for permethylated glycans at high temperatures [47].	Moderate to Good – Capable of separating some linkage isomers [50].
Peak Capacity/Resolution	High – Lower than HILIC with UHPLC phases in one study [51], but provides high selectivity [6].	Very High – Can produce narrow peak widths (e.g., ≤30 seconds), leading to high peak capacity [46].	High with UHPLC – Superior peak capacity reported due to high selectivity and ability to use long columns with low backpressure [6].
Retention of Sialylated Glycans	Strong retention – Increased retention for charged glycans [6].	Variable – Enhanced with ion-pairing agents; otherwise, retention is quite low [6] [51].	Strong retention – Retained according to size and polarity [6].
Correlation of Retention with Composition	Poor correlation – Retention is not determined solely by monosaccharide composition, indicating significance of 3D structure [51].	Good correlation – Retention can be correlated to monosaccharide composition by multiple linear regression [51].	Good correlation – Retention can be correlated to monosaccharide composition by multiple linear regression [51].
MS Compatibility	Good – Chemically stable over a wide pH range (1-14) [49]. Can have interference with ESI voltage noted [6].	Excellent – Highly compatible with ESI-MS due to volatile mobile phases [46].	Good – High organic solvent content favorable for ESI sensitivity [46] [48].

Experimental Support and Protocols

Experimental Context: A systematic comparison of HILIC, Ion-Pairing RP (IP-RPC), and PGC for analyzing 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) labeled glycans from fetuin, RNase-B, and a monoclonal antibody found low correlation between the retention times in the different methods, confirming their orthogonality [51]. The study utilized ultra-high-performance stationary phases for IP-RPC and HILIC to maximize performance.

• Key Finding on Orthogonality: Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) analysis showed that retention times in HILIC and IP-RPC could be adequately modeled based on the monosaccharide composition of the glycans. In contrast, no adequate model was obtained for PGC chromatography, indicating that the three-dimensional structure of the analytes, not just their composition, is a significant factor for retention on PGC. This fundamentally different retention behavior is the basis for its orthogonality [51].

• Protocol for 2D-LC Coupling (RP-PGC): A robust heart-cut 2D-LC system combining RP and PGC was developed for metabolomics. The setup used standard HPLC equipment with one additional pump and a two-position six-port valve [44].

  • First Dimension (RP): An Atlantis T3 C18 column (2.1 × 150 mm, 3 µm) was used. Mobile phase: (A) water with 0.1% formic acid and 1% ACN; (B) ACN with 0.1% formic acid and 1% water. Gradient: 0-95% B in 13 min after a 2 min hold. Flow rate: 250 µL/min [44].
  • Heart-Cutting: The early-eluting, low-retained fraction from the RP column (containing polar metabolites) was transferred to the second dimension.
  • Second Dimension (PGC): A Hypercarb PGC column (2.1 × 150 mm, 5 µm) was used. Mobile phase: (A) water with 1% ACN; (B) 90% water + 10% formic acid. Gradient: 1-40% B in 11.5 min after a 2.5 min hold. Flow rate: 250 µL/min [44].
  • Result: This setup doubled the number of retained intracellular metabolites compared to RPLC alone and provided distinct selectivity for resolving challenging isobaric compounds like sugar phosphates [44].

Application in Orthogonal Separations and Experimental Workflows

The combination of RP and PGC in a multidimensional setup leverages their complementary selectivities to significantly enhance the resolution of complex samples. The following workflow illustrates a typical 2D-LC approach for comprehensive glycan or metabolome analysis.

Workflow Description:

• Sample Preparation: Glycans are released from proteins and may be derivatized, depending on the chosen analytical strategy [47].
• First Dimension (RP): The sample is initially separated on a RP column. Hydrophobic, well-retained compounds (like permethylated glycans) are separated and can be sent directly to the mass spectrometer [47] [44].
• Heart-Cutting and Transfer: The early-eluting fraction from the RP column, which contains highly polar and hydrophilic compounds that are poorly retained by RP (e.g., native glycans, sugar phosphates), is selectively transferred to the second dimension [44].
• Second Dimension (PGC): The transferred hydrophilic fraction is then separated on a PGC column, which provides excellent retention and unique selectivity for these polar compounds, often resolving isomers missed in the first dimension [44].
• Detection: Both separation dimensions are coupled to a mass spectrometer for detection, leveraging the high peak capacity and orthogonality of the combined system for comprehensive analysis [44] [45].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of these chromatographic techniques requires specific reagents and materials. The following table lists key solutions for the experiments cited in this guide.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Glycan Analysis

Item	Function / Application	Specific Example / Note
PGC Columns	Separation of native and reduced glycans with high isomer selectivity [6] [47].	Hypercarb PGC column (e.g., 2.1 x 150 mm, 5 µm) [44].
RP Columns (C18)	Separation of derivatized glycans; requires hydrophobic interaction [46] [47].	Atlantis T3 C18 [44] or similar UHPLC-grade columns for high resolution.
Derivatization Reagents	Imparts hydrophobicity for RP retention and can aid detection [46] [47].	PMP (1-Phenyl-3-Methyl-5-Pyrazolone): For RP separation with UV detection [46].Permethylation: Increases hydrophobicity, allows RP retention, and yields informative MS/MS spectra [46] [47].Hydrazide reagents (e.g., dansylhydrazine): Simple and stable derivatization for RP separation [46].
Fluorescent Labels	Allows highly sensitive detection of glycans after separation, common in HILIC and RP profiling [6].	2-AB (2-Aminobenzamide): Commonly used for HILIC and PGC with fluorescence detection [6] [51].
Volatile Buffers & Solvents	Essential for mobile phase preparation in LC-MS applications to prevent ion suppression and source contamination [44].	Ammonium acetate, formic acid, LC-MS grade water, and acetonitrile [44] [48].
Ion-Pairing Reagents	Added to mobile phase in RP to improve retention and peak shape of charged analytes like sialylated glycans [6] [51].	e.g., Trialkylammonium salts; however, can contaminate MS source [44].
AK-Toxin II	AK-Toxin II, MF:C22H25NO6, MW:399.4 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
N-Boc-PEG8-alcohol	N-Boc-PEG8-alcohol, MF:C21H43NO10, MW:469.6 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

PGC and RP chromatography are powerful and highly complementary techniques for orthogonal separations in glycan analysis and metabolomics. RP chromatography, often requiring analyte derivatization, provides high peak capacity and is a ubiquitous, robust platform. PGC chromatography offers a unique retention mechanism that excels at separating isomeric structures and retaining native, polar analytes without derivatization. The choice between them, or the decision to use them in concert via multidimensional LC, should be guided by the specific analytical goals. For high-throughput glycan profiling where derivatization is feasible, RP offers excellent performance. For in-depth characterization of complex samples rich in isomers, PGC is unparalleled. Ultimately, as the experimental data shows, their on-line combination in a 2D-LC setup represents a powerful strategy to dramatically expand metabolome coverage and resolution, thereby providing more comprehensive biological information for drug development and clinical research [44] [45].

Glycosylation is a critical quality attribute (CQA) for therapeutic proteins, directly influencing their efficacy, stability, and safety [14] [52]. Within bioprocess development, robust analytical methods for glycosylation are essential during cell line development, lot-release analytics, and comparability studies [14] [24]. This guide objectively compares Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography-Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography (HILIC-UPLC) with other established and emerging glycan analysis techniques, providing experimental data and protocols to inform method selection.

Multiple analytical platforms are employed for glycan analysis, each with distinct strengths and limitations. The table below summarizes the core characteristics of the primary methods used in the biopharmaceutical industry.

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Primary Methods

Method	Key Principle	Typical Throughput	Quantitative Precision (CV)	Key Applications in Bioprocessing
HILIC-UPLC (2-AB)	Separation of fluorescently labeled glycans based on hydrophilicity [15].	Moderate (sequential analysis)	High (e.g., <5% for major glycans) [3]	Gold standard for lot-release, comparability studies [17].
MALDI-TOF-MS	Mass analysis of released glycans; can be combined with internal standards [14].	High (analysis of hundreds of samples in minutes) [14]	~10% CV with internal standard approach [14]	High-throughput clone screening, process optimization [14].
LC-MS (Intact/Subunit)	Mass analysis of intact proteins or subunits to deduce glycan composition [52] [17].	Moderate to High	Varies with platform	Early clone screening, multi-attribute method (MAM) [52] [17].
CE-LIF	Capillary electrophoresis separation of fluorescently labeled glycans [3].	High (multicapillary systems allow parallel analysis) [24]	Comparable to HILIC for major glycans [3]	High-throughput screening, clone selection [24].

Application in Bioprocess Development

Cell Line Development

Cell line development requires the rapid analysis of hundreds of clones to select candidates with desired glycosylation patterns, often with limited sample material.

• Throughput and Sample Requirements: A 2024 study directly compared four rapid methods against the conventional 2-AB method for this application [17]. The findings are summarized in the table below.

Table 2: Performance of Rapid N-Glycan Methods for Cell Line Development

Analytical Method	Sample Requirement	Testing Time	Identifiable Glycoforms	Suitability for Clone Screening
Conventional 2-AB	Milligram level	Several days [17]	Comprehensive	Low (due to time and sample needs)
Rapid 2-AB (Kit-based)	~40 µg	<1 day [17]	Comprehensive	Medium
Reduction LC-MS	Microgram level [17]	Minutes [17]	Major glycoforms, but cannot resolve paired species like G0F/G2F and 2xG1F [17]	High
Off-line IdeS LC-MS	Microgram level [17]	Minutes (including digestion) [17]	Major glycoforms with site-specific information for Fc/2 fragments [17]	High
2D-LC-MS (On-line IdeS)	Microgram level [17]	~15 minutes total analysis time [17]	Major glycoforms, automated	Very High

• Supporting Experimental Data: The study demonstrated that all four rapid methods provided comparable N-glycan data for major species, enabling effective clone selection. The 2D-LC-MS method with on-line IdeS digestion was highlighted for its excellent balance of low sample requirement, high speed, and automation potential [17].

Lot-Release Analytics and Comparability Studies

For lot-release and demonstrating biosimilarity, methods must be highly precise, accurate, and validated to monitor critical glycosylation attributes like afucosylation, galactosylation, and sialylation.

• Method Precision and Accuracy: A comprehensive 2014 study compared multiple separation-based methods using a therapeutic antibody reference material [3]. HILIC-UPLC with 2-AB labeling served as the reference method, against which others were benchmarked. The study found that all methods, including HILIC-UPLC, CE-LIF, and HPAEC-PAD, showed excellent precision and accuracy for major glycan species. However, differences were observed in the detection and quantitation of minor glycan species, particularly sialylated glycans [3]. This underscores the importance of method selection when specific low-abundance glycans are CQAs.

• Orthogonal Confirmation in Comparability: A 2024 comparability study on Rituximab products utilized a panel of orthogonal methods, including HILIC-FLD, HRMS for glycopeptides (MAM), intact mass LC-MS, and middle-down NMR [52]. The results demonstrated agreement across all methods for major glycoforms, thereby increasing confidence in the analytical conclusion that the products were highly similar. This multi-method approach is a regulatory best practice for comparability exercises [52].

• High-Throughput Solutions for Stability Studies: A 2025 study presented an optimized MALDI-TOF-MS method with a full glycome internal standard approach, which was adapted for 96-well plates. This method enabled the analysis of at least 192 samples in a single experiment with high precision (average CV ~10%) and was validated on trastuzumab [14]. This makes it a highly promising solution for stability and batch-to-batch consistency testing where throughput is a priority.

Experimental Protocols

Detailed Protocol: HILIC-UPLC with 2-AB Labeling

This protocol is widely regarded as the gold standard for quantitative released N-glycan analysis [3] [17].

• Denaturation & Release: The glycoprotein (e.g., 40-100 µg of mAb) is denatured using a surfactant (e.g., SDS) or a denaturing buffer. The denaturant is then compatibleized with the enzyme, often by dilution. N-glycans are enzymatically released using PNGase F [17].
• Fluorescent Labeling: The released glycans are labeled with a fluorophore, most commonly 2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB). This step confers high sensitivity for fluorescence detection [52] [3].
• Cleanup: Excess fluorescent label is removed from the labeled glycans using solid-phase extraction (SPE) with hydrophilic interaction (HILIC) or graphitized carbon cartridges [52].
• HILIC-UPLC Analysis & Detection: The purified, labeled glycans are separated on a HILIC column (e.g., Waters BEH Amide) using a gradient of increasing aqueous content in an organic solvent (e.g., acetonitrile). Detection is via fluorescence (FLR), and identification is achieved by comparing retention times to a 2-AB labeled glycan standard ladder, expressed in Glucose Units (GU) [30] [3].
• Optional MS Coupling: For structural confirmation, the method can be coupled to ESI-MS/MS [30].

Detailed Protocol: High-Throughput MALDI-TOF-MS with Internal Standards

This protocol is optimized for rapid, high-throughput screening applications [14].

• Glycan Release & Internal Standard Addition: N-glycans are released from the protein. A key differentiator of this protocol is the addition of a "full glycome internal standard" library. This library consists of glycans that are isotopically labeled (+3 Da), providing a matched internal standard for each native glycan [14].
• Purification in 96-Well Format: The glycans and internal standards are purified using CL-4B Sepharose beads packed in a 96-well plate, replacing traditional cotton HILIC SPE for better compatibility and throughput. This step can be automated on a liquid handling robot [14].
• MALDI-TOF-MS Analysis: The purified samples are spotted onto a MALDI target plate and analyzed by MALDI-TOF-MS. Each sample measurement is completed within seconds.
• Data Processing: Quantitative results are obtained by comparing the signal intensity of each native glycan to its corresponding isotopic internal standard, improving quantitative accuracy. Data processing can be automated [14].

The following workflow diagram illustrates the key steps and decision points in the high-throughput MALDI-TOF-MS method.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of glycan analysis methods relies on specific reagents and tools. The following table details essential items for setting up these experiments.

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Tools for Glycan Analysis

Item Name	Function / Application	Specific Examples / Notes
PNGase F	Enzyme for releasing N-linked glycans from the protein backbone.	Core reagent for all released glycan analysis protocols [52].
Fluorescent Labels (2-AB, APTS)	Tag glycans for highly sensitive fluorescence detection in HILIC and CE.	2-AB: Common for HILIC-UPLC [3]. APTS: Used for CE-LIF [3].
Isotopic Internal Standard Library	Improves quantitative accuracy in MALDI-TOF-MS by providing a matched standard for each native glycan.	Key component for the high-precision MALDI-TOF-MS method [14].
HILIC SPE Material	Purifies released glycans and removes contaminants after labeling.	Diol-based cartridges [52] or CL-4B Sepharose beads (for 96-well plates) [14].
Glycan Standard Ladder	Calibrates retention time to Glucose Units (GU) for structural assignment in HILIC.	Essential for identifying glycans based on calibrated elution positions [30].
IdeS Enzyme	Digests mAbs into Fc/2 and F(ab')2 fragments for subunit analysis by LC-MS.	Enables middle-level analysis, simplifying mass spectra [17].

The selection of a glycan analysis method is dictated by the specific stage and need within bioprocess development. HILIC-UPLC (2-AB) remains the gold standard for lot-release and comparability studies where utmost precision and regulatory acceptance are paramount. For cell line development and process optimization, where speed and minimal sample consumption are critical, emerging techniques like high-throughput MALDI-TOF-MS and rapid LC-MS methods at the subunit level offer significant advantages. An orthogonal strategy, combining the high-precision of HILIC with the throughput of MS-based methods, provides the most comprehensive approach to ensuring the quality of biotherapeutic glycosylation.

Optimizing Your Glycan Analysis: Strategies for Robustness, Throughput, and Handling Low-Abundant Species

In the biopharmaceutical industry, glycosylation is a Critical Quality Attribute (CQA) for therapeutic proteins, influencing their efficacy, stability, and safety [14] [53]. As the market expands with monoclonal antibodies and biosimilars, the demand for efficient and reliable glycosylation analysis has intensified [14]. Traditional glycan analysis methods, such as the conventional 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) method, are often labor-intensive, time-consuming, and require milligram-level sample quantities, making them unsuitable for high-throughput demands [17]. This creates a significant bottleneck in critical development stages like cell line selection and process optimization, where hundreds of clones must be screened rapidly with limited sample material [17]. Consequently, implementing automated sample preparation using 96-well plate formats and liquid handling robots has become essential. This guide objectively compares automated high-throughput solutions within the broader methodological debate, focusing on their performance against traditional and emerging glycan analysis techniques.

Comparative Analysis of High-Throughput Glycan Analysis Methods

To meet the demand for speed and efficiency, several analytical methods have been adapted for high-throughput workflows. The table below compares four rapid methods against the conventional 2-AB method and a novel MALDI-TOF-MS approach, highlighting their suitability for automated, high-throughput environments.

Table 1: Performance Comparison of High-Throughput Glycan Analysis Methods

Method	Testing Time	Sample Requirement	Key Advantages	Reported Precision (CV)	Best Suited Application
Conventional 2-AB [17]	Several days	Milligrams	Considered the gold standard; high fluorescent response	N/A	Batch release testing where time is less critical
Rapid 2-AB [17]	< 1 day	Micrograms	Faster than conventional method; high labelling efficiency	N/A	General quality control in development
Reduction / Subunit LC-MS [17]	Minutes	Micrograms	Rapid; reduces mAb molecular weight for simpler analysis	N/A	Rapid profiling at subunit level
2D-LC-MS with On-line IdeS [17]	Minutes	Micrograms	Fully automated digestion and analysis; high efficiency	N/A	High-throughput clone screening
MALDI-TOF-MS with Internal Standards [14] [53]	~1 hour for 192 samples	Micrograms (enables 192 samples/run)	Exceptional speed; high precision with internal standard	~10.4% (repeatability)	Ultra-high-throughput screening for clone selection & batch consistency

The data reveals a clear trade-off between speed and the depth of information. While LC-MS-based methods provide rapid profiling [17], the MALDI-TOF-MS method with a full glycome internal standard stands out for scenarios demanding utmost speed and quantitative precision, achieving a coefficient of variation (CV) of around 10% and analyzing up to 192 samples in a single experiment [14] [53].

Experimental Protocols for Automated Glycan Analysis

High-Throughput MALDI-TOF-MS with Internal Standard Workflow

This protocol is optimized for 96-well plates and automation, using trastuzumab (Herceptin) as a model therapeutic protein [14] [53].

• Step 1: N-Glycan Release. Denature and deglycosylate the protein sample (e.g., 40 µg of mAb) using PNGase F to release glycans [17].
• Step 2: Internal Standard Preparation. Generate a full glycome internal standard library via a one-step reductive isotope labeling reaction. This creates internal standard glycans with a mass 3 Da higher than their native counterparts [14] [53].
• Step 3: Automated Purification (Sepharose HILIC SPE). This is a key automation-enabling step. Instead of hand-packed cotton tips, use CL-4B Sepharose beads packed into a 96-well plate for hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) solid-phase extraction (SPE). This format is compatible with liquid handling robotic workstations for automated purification and enrichment [14].
• Step 4: Mixing and Spotting. Mix the purified sample glycans with their corresponding internal standards.
• Step 5: MALDI-TOF-MS Analysis. Analyze the spotted samples using MALDI-TOF-MS. The acquisition of hundreds of samples can be completed within minutes [14] [53].
• Step 6: Data Processing. Use automated data processing to quantify each glycan by calculating the ratio of its signal intensity to that of its matched internal standard. This entire workflow, from preparation to quantitative results, can be completed in approximately one hour [14].

Diagram: Workflow for Automated High-Throughput Glycan Analysis

2D-LC-MS Method with On-line Digestion

This protocol is designed for maximum automation in the LC-MS workflow, requiring minimal manual intervention after sample injection [17].

• Step 1: Sample Injection. The monoclonal antibody sample is injected directly into the first dimension (1D) of the 2D-LC-MS system.
• Step 2: On-line IdeS Digestion. The sample passes through an immobilized IdeS-HPLC column in the first dimension. The IdeS enzyme cleaves the antibody into F(ab')2 and Fc/2 subunits in approximately 10 minutes.
• Step 3: Heart-Cutting. The Fc/2 subunit (approximately 25 kDa), which contains the N-glycosylation site, is selectively transferred ("heart-cut") from the first dimension to the second dimension via a switching valve.
• Step 4: Second Dimension Analysis. The Fc/2 subunit is analyzed in the second dimension using a reversed-phase UHPLC column coupled to a Q-TOF mass spectrometer. This separates and detects the glycoforms based on their mass.
• Step 5: Data Analysis. The resulting mass spectra are deconvoluted, and the relative abundance of each glycoform is calculated. This method provides a rapid, automated solution for obtaining glycan distribution data from intact mAbs without offline sample preparation [17].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Hardware

Implementing a robust, automated sample preparation pipeline requires specific reagents and hardware. The following table details the key components for the featured MALDI-TOF-MS and LC-MS workflows.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions and Hardware for Automated Glycan Analysis

Category	Item	Function in the Workflow
Consumables	96-Well HILIC SPE Plates (e.g., with CL-4B Sepharose beads) [14]	Enable high-throughput, automated purification and enrichment of released glycans in a 96-well format.
Consumables	Immobilized IdeS Enzyme Cartridge [17]	Allows for rapid (10-minute), online digestion of monoclonal antibodies into subunits for 2D-LC-MS analysis.
Reagents	Full Glycome Internal Standard Library [14] [53]	Provides isotope-labeled internal standards for each native glycan, enabling precise quantification in MALDI-TOF-MS.
Reagents	AdvanceBio Gly-X N-Glycan Prep Kit [17]	A commercial kit that provides optimized reagents for rapid glycan release, 2-AB fluorescent labeling, and cleanup.
Hardware	Automated Liquid Handling Workstation [54] [55]	Robots (e.g., from Tecan, Hamilton) that automate pipetting, dilution, and plate handling, improving reproducibility and throughput.
Hardware	MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometer [14] [53]	Instrument for ultra-rapid analysis of purified glycans, capable of processing hundreds of samples in minutes.
Hardware	2D-LC-MS System (UHPLC coupled to Q-TOF) [17]	Integrated chromatographic and mass spectrometry system for automated separation and identification of glycoforms.

Quantitative Method Qualification and Comparison

The reliability of any high-throughput method hinges on its validated performance. The MALDI-TOF-MS method with internal standards has been rigorously qualified, providing robust experimental data for comparison [14] [53].

Table 3: Qualification Data for the High-Throughput MALDI-TOF-MS Method

Qualification Parameter	Experimental Condition	Reported Result
Repeatability	Six replicate analyses in one day	Average CV of 10.41% (Range: 6.44% - 12.73%)
Intermediate Precision	Analyses over three different days	Average CV of 10.78% (Range: 8.93% - 12.83%)
Linearity	75-fold concentration gradient	Average R² value of 0.9937 (Range: >0.9818 to 0.9985)
Specificity	Comparison with buffer control	No interfering peaks detected in the N-glycan region, confirming high specificity.
Throughput	Sample preparation to data	Analysis of 192 samples in a single experiment; quantitative results in ~1 hour.

The internal standard approach is a key differentiator. When a known amount of G0F glycan was spiked into a sample, quantification using the internal standard correctly reflected the increase, whereas label-free quantification methods did not, demonstrating superior accuracy for detecting fluctuations in glycan abundance [53].

Discussion: Strategic Implementation in Biopharmaceutical Development

The choice of an automated sample preparation and analysis strategy must align with the specific needs of each development stage. The high-speed, high-precision MALDI-TOF-MS method is perfectly suited for early-stage clone screening and process optimization, where thousands of samples must be processed quickly to inform decisions [14] [53]. Its high throughput directly addresses the bottleneck in cell line development. For laboratories deeply invested in LC-MS platforms, the 2D-LC-MS method offers a compelling, highly automated alternative that requires no offline digestion steps [17].

These automated, high-throughput methods represent a significant evolution from traditional HILIC-UPLC. While HILIC-UPLC is a robust and well-established technique, these newer workflows offer dramatic improvements in analysis speed and sample throughput, often reducing analysis time from days to hours or even minutes [14] [17]. The integration of 96-well plate formats and liquid handling robots is the enabling factor behind this leap, ensuring that sample preparation is no longer the rate-limiting step in glycan analysis. By adopting these automated systems, scientists can accelerate biopharmaceutical development while enhancing data quality and operational consistency.

The glycosylation profile of therapeutic proteins, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), is a critical quality attribute that directly impacts product efficacy, stability, and safety [56] [57]. Among the various glycan species, sialylated glycans present a particular analytical challenge due to their low abundance, structural diversity, and labile nature. The accurate detection and quantitation of these minor species are essential, as sialylation can influence the pharmacokinetics and anti-inflammatory activity of biotherapeutics [56] [58]. This guide provides a objective comparison of analytical methods for glycan profiling, with focus on their performance in analyzing sialylated glycans.

Methodologies for Glycan Analysis: Experimental Protocols

A comprehensive understanding of method capabilities requires insight into their experimental workflows. The following section outlines standard protocols for key techniques used in glycan analysis.

HILIC-UPLC with Fluorescent Detection

HILIC-UPLC with fluorescent detection is widely regarded as the gold-standard method for glycan profiling [57]. The standard protocol involves:

• Glycan Release: Enzymatic release of N-glycans from the glycoprotein using Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) [7] [59].
• Fluorescent Labeling: Derivatization of released glycans with a fluorophore such as 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB). This step enables highly sensitive fluorescence detection and facilitates separation by introducing a hydrophobic tag [56] [57].
• Purification: Cleanup of labeled glycans using solid-phase extraction (SPE) to remove excess label and salts [7].
• Chromatographic Separation: Analysis on a HILIC-UPLC system equipped with an amide-based stationary phase. Separation is typically performed using a gradient of increasing aqueous content (e.g., ammonium formate buffer, pH 4.4) in an acetonitrile-rich mobile phase [58] [57]. Glycans are separated based on size and hydrophilicity, with larger, more polar glycans eluting later.
• Data Analysis: Peaks are identified by comparison to an external standard of 2-AB labeled glucose polymers, which provides a Glucose Unit (GU) value for each glycan. This value is compared to a GU database for preliminary structural assignment [7].

Capillary Electrophoresis-Laser Induced Fluorescence (CE-LIF)

CE-LIF is a high-resolution technique that offers an alternative separation mechanism [56]. Its workflow is similar to HILIC-UPLC with key differences in the separation and detection components.

• Glycan Release and Labeling: N-glycans are released with PNGase F and labeled with a charged fluorophore, such as 8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid (APTS). The negative charge from the label is essential for electrophoretic separation [56].
• Separation and Detection: The APTS-labeled glycans are separated by capillary electrophoresis based on their charge-to-size ratio in an acidic buffer system and detected via laser-induced fluorescence [56]. This method is particularly suited for high-throughput applications.

Mass Spectrometry-Based Methods

Mass spectrometry provides compositional information and can be coupled with various separation techniques [60].

• Sample Preparation: Released glycans can be analyzed directly (native or labeled) or as glycopeptides after proteolytic digestion (e.g., with trypsin) [61] [60].
• Analysis: Several MS platforms are used, including:
  • ESI-MS of Glycopeptides: Electrospray ionization MS analysis of tryptic glycopeptides, often with prior HILIC purification [60].
  • MALDI-TOF-MS of Released Glycans: Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight MS analysis of released glycans. This method offers high throughput but can be prone to in-source decay of sialic acids, unless they are chemically stabilized (e.g., by ethyl esterification) [14] [60].
  • LC-ESI-MS: Coupling of liquid chromatography (e.g., with Porous Graphitized Carbon, PGC, stationary phases) online with ESI-MS. PGC is notable for its strong retention and ability to separate isomeric glycans [58] [60].
• Ion Mobility-MS (IM-MS): An emerging technique that separates ions based on their size, charge, and shape. IM-MS can be coupled with LC (e.g., HILIC-IM-MS) to distinguish sialic acid linkage isomers (α2,3- vs. α2,6-linked) based on characteristic fragmentation patterns, adding a powerful dimension for structural characterization [58].

The following workflow diagram illustrates the general process for HILIC-UPLC and CE-LIF analysis of N-glycans, highlighting their parallel paths with shared initial steps and distinct separation/detection phases.

Comparative Performance Data

The following tables consolidate quantitative data from method comparison studies, focusing on precision and the ability to quantify sialylated glycans.

Table 1: Comparison of Precision for Major and Minor Glycan Species Across Different Methods [56]

Analytical Method	Precision (CV%) for Major Glycans (e.g., G0F, G1F)	Precision (CV%) for Minor Glycans (Sialylated Species)
HILIC(2-AB) - Reference	Excellent (< 5%)	Excellent (< 5%)
CE-LIF(APTS-HR1)	Excellent (< 5%)	Excellent (< 5%)
DSA-FACE(APTS)	Excellent (< 5%)	Good to Excellent
HPAEC-PAD	Excellent (< 5%)	Good to Excellent

Table 2: Performance of Mass Spectrometry-Based Methods for Sialylated Glycan Analysis [60]

Mass Spectrometry Method	Key Characteristic for Sialylated Glycans	Reported Challenge
Positive MALDI-MS Glycans	Rapid analysis	Prone to in-source decay; low quantification of sialylated forms
MALDI-MS Stabilized Glycans	Improved detection via sialic acid derivatization	Requires additional sample preparation step
Negative MALDI-MS Glycopeptides	Reduced in-source decay; improved ionization	---
PGC-ESI-MS	High selectivity for isomers; strong retention of charged glycans	---
LC-ESI-MS (Q-TOF) Glycopeptides	Good precision and accuracy	Potential for in-source fragmentation

Table 3: High-Throughput MALDI-TOF-MS Performance for Trastuzumab Glycan Analysis [14]

Performance Metric	Result	Implication for Sialylated Glycan Analysis
Repeatability (CV%)	6.44% - 12.73% (Avg. 10.41%)	Good precision even for low-abundance species
Intermediate Precision (CV%)	8.93% - 12.83% (Avg. 10.78%)	Robust method performance across different days
Linearity (R²)	> 0.99	Suitable for quantitative analysis across a dynamic range
Throughput	192 samples in a single run	Excellent for rapid screening in quality control

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful glycan analysis relies on a suite of specialized reagents and tools. The following table details key components used in the featured methodologies.

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Glycan Analysis

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Examples / Notes
PNGase F	Enzyme for releasing N-linked glycans from glycoproteins.	Standard enzyme for N-glycan analysis; ineffective for O-glycans [7].
Fluorescent Labels (2-AB, APTS)	Derivatization for sensitive fluorescence detection and altered chromatographic/electrophoretic properties.	2-AB for HILIC; APTS (charged) for CE-LIF [56] [57].
Procainamide	A fluorescent label that enhances detection sensitivity and can improve MS ionization [58].
HILIC Stationary Phases	Chromatographic media for glycan separation; typically amide-or silica-based.	Used in UHPLC columns for high-resolution separation [6] [57].
Porous Graphitized Carbon (PGC)	Stationary phase for LC-MS offering high selectivity for isomeric glycans.	Provides strong retention for polar and charged glycans [6] [60].
Ion Mobility Spectrometer	Instrument for separating gas-phase ions by size, charge, and shape.	Coupled with MS (IM-MS) to distinguish glycan isomers, including sialic acid linkages [58].
Sialidase Enzymes	Exoglycosidases that specifically remove sialic acid residues.	Used for confirmatory studies of sialylation (e.g., linkage-specific) [58].

The data from comparative studies indicate that no single method is superior in all aspects; rather, the choice of technique depends on the specific analytical requirements.

• For High-Resolution Profiling and Quantitation: HILIC-UPLC-FLD remains the benchmark for reliable relative quantitation of both major and minor glycan species, including sialylated forms, due to its excellent precision and robust performance [56] [57]. Its well-established GU databases facilitate preliminary structural assignment.
• For High-Throughput Screening: CE-LIF and advanced MALDI-TOF-MS platforms with internal standard strategies offer compelling solutions when analyzing large sample sets, such as during clone screening or batch release testing [56] [14]. While CE-LIF provides high resolution, MALDI-TOF-MS offers unparalleled speed.
• For Structural Characterization and Isomer Differentiation: When detailed structural information is required, especially for sialic acid linkages, PGC-LC-MS and HILIC-IM-MS are powerful tools. PGC provides exceptional isomer separation [6] [60], while IM-MS can directly identify and quantify α2,3- and α2,6-linked sialic acids without complex derivatization or enzyme arrays [58].

In conclusion, accurate analysis of sialylated glycans is achievable with multiple techniques. For routine profiling and comparability studies, HILIC-UPLC offers a robust, precise, and widely accepted solution. For applications demanding extreme throughput or deep structural insight into linkage isomers, CE-LIF, MALDI-TOF-MS, and advanced LC-IM-MS workflows provide powerful complementary alternatives.

In the field of glycomics, the reliability of analytical data across extended timeframes and multiple operators is paramount for both research credibility and regulatory compliance. Robustness—defined as a measure of a method's capacity to remain unaffected by small but deliberate variations in procedural parameters—provides an indication of its suitability and reliability during normal usage [62]. For large-scale studies involving glycan analysis, particularly in pharmaceutical development and clinical biomarker discovery, establishing long-term robustness is not merely beneficial but essential. Such studies often span months or years, involve multiple analysts and instruments, and generate data that must be comparable across time and locations. The International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) and United States Pharmacopeia (USP) guidelines define robustness as an intrinsic method characteristic that should be investigated during development to identify critical factors that might affect performance [62]. This guide objectively compares the performance of hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography with ultra-performance liquid chromatography (HILIC-UPLC) against alternative glycan analysis techniques, with particular focus on between-day and between-analyst variation metrics that define robustness for large-scale applications.

Core Concepts: Precision Parameters in Method Validation

Method validation for long-term robustness requires careful assessment of specific precision parameters that collectively determine a method's reliability under varying conditions. According to established guidelines, precision is categorized into three distinct levels [63] [64]:

• Repeatability (intra-assay precision): Expresses the precision under the same operating conditions over a short interval of time, where factors such as analyst, instrument, and reagents remain constant.
• Intermediate precision: Assesses within-laboratory variations, including different days, different analysts, different equipment, or different reagent lots.
• Reproducibility: Represents precision between laboratories, typically assessed through collaborative studies.

The terms "ruggedness" and "robustness" have historically been used somewhat interchangeably, but current guidelines make an important distinction. Ruggedness refers to the degree of reproducibility of test results under a variety of conditions such as different laboratories, analysts, instruments, and reagent lots—essentially addressing external variables. Conversely, robustness specifically measures a method's capacity to remain unaffected by small, deliberate variations in procedural parameters listed in the method documentation, thus addressing internal variables [62]. For large-scale glycan analysis studies, both concepts are critical, but robustness testing provides the foundational assurance that a method will perform consistently despite minor but inevitable procedural fluctuations.

Comparative Analysis of Glycan Separation Techniques

Technical Approaches and Their Characteristics

Glycan analysis employs several orthogonal separation techniques, each with distinct mechanisms and performance characteristics. A comparative study investigating IgG N-glycans pooled from healthy mammalian species evaluated three high-resolution separation methods: HILIC-UPLC, reversed phase (RP)-UPLC, and capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection (CE-LIF) [34]. Each technique separates glycans based on different physicochemical properties, resulting in complementary glycan profiles. HILIC-UPLC separates glycans based on their hydrophilicity and number of sugar units, RP-UPLC separates by hydrophobicity, while CE-LIF separates by charge and size. These fundamental differences in separation mechanisms directly impact their suitability for large-scale studies requiring long-term robustness.

Performance Comparison for Large-Scale Applications

The following table summarizes key performance characteristics of the three primary separation techniques relevant to robustness assessment:

Table 1: Comparison of Glycan Analysis Techniques for Large-Scale Studies

Parameter	HILIC-UPLC	RP-UPLC	CE-LIF
Separation Mechanism	Hydrophilicity	Hydrophobicity	Charge and size
Profile Comparison to HILIC	Reference method	Difficult to compare due to co-elution of structures	Similar abundance results
Analysis Time	High-throughput (24 samples/day/system) [65]	Variable	Moderate
Between-Day CV for Abundant Glycans	<2% [66]	Not specified	Similar to HILIC [34]
Between-Day CV for Low-Abundance Glycans	16-29% (for peaks <1% abundance) [66]	Not specified	Not specified
Handling of Complex Samples	Excellent for mammalian IgG N-glycome	Separates by classes leading to co-elution	Good for mammalian IgG N-glycome

Quantitative data from a comprehensive long-term study evaluating IgG N-glycan profiling using GlycoWorks RapiFluor-MS with HILIC-UPLC analysis demonstrates exceptional robustness [66]. The study, conducted over 5 months with 335 technical replicates randomly distributed across 67 96-well plates using multiple UHPLC systems and chromatographic columns, showed that the most abundant peaks (comprising ~75% of the detected IgG N-glycome) all had coefficients of variation (CVs) lower than 2%. Only low-abundance glycan peaks with individual relative peak areas below 1% showed higher CVs ranging from 16% to 29%, though these collectively represented less than 2% of the total detected IgG N-glycome [66].

Experimental Protocols for Assessing Between-Day and Between-Analyst Variation

Protocol for Intermediate Precision Testing

Establishing a rigorous protocol for assessing between-day and between-analyst variation is essential for proper robustness validation. The following step-by-step protocol aligns with ICH and USP recommendations [63] [64]:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare a standardized pool of glycan samples from a relevant biological source (e.g., human plasma pooled from multiple donors). Aliquot and store at -20°C or below to ensure stability throughout the validation period.

• Experimental Design:

  • Two analysts independently prepare replicate sample preparations (minimum of six each) on different days.
  • Each analyst uses their own standards and solutions, preferably from different reagent lots.
  • Analyses are performed on different HPLC systems when possible.
  • The entire sequence is repeated across at least five separate days to account for day-to-day variability.

• Data Collection: For each analysis, record the relative abundance of all major glycan peaks. For HILIC-UPLC analyses, this typically includes GP1 through GP16 or similar peak groupings.

• Statistical Analysis:

  • Calculate mean, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation (%CV) for each glycan peak within each analyst's data (repeatability) and between analysts (intermediate precision).
  • Perform statistical testing (e.g., Student's t-test) to determine if significant differences exist between analysts' mean values.
  • Analyze variance components to quantify the contribution of between-day, between-analyst, and residual variability.

• Acceptance Criteria: Establish pre-defined acceptance criteria, typically requiring %CV <5-10% for major analytes and <15-20% for minor analytes, with no statistically significant differences between analysts' results.

Robustness Testing Using Experimental Design

For comprehensive robustness testing, a multivariate approach is significantly more efficient than traditional one-variable-at-a-time studies. The Plackett-Burman design is particularly suitable for identifying critical factors with minimal experimental runs [65] [62]. The protocol involves:

• Identify Critical Parameters: Select potentially influential factors such as mobile phase pH (±0.2 units), buffer concentration (±10%), column temperature (±3°C), flow rate (±5%), gradient variations, and detection wavelength.

• Experimental Matrix: Implement a Plackett-Burman design in 12 runs for up to 11 factors, where each factor is set at high (+1) and low (-1) levels across different experimental runs.

• Data Analysis: Use analysis of variance (ANOVA) to identify factors with statistically significant effects on critical quality attributes such as peak resolution, retention time, and quantitation accuracy.

• Establish System Suitability: Based on results, define system suitability criteria in the method documentation to ensure robust performance during routine use.

Visualization of Experimental Workflows

Robustness Testing and Validation Workflow

Figure 1: Comprehensive workflow for method robustness testing and validation, illustrating the iterative process from method development through final implementation.

Precision Assessment Methodology

Figure 2: Methodology for assessing different precision levels in method validation, highlighting the hierarchical structure from basic repeatability through full reproducibility.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of robust glycan analysis methods requires specific high-quality reagents and materials. The following table details essential components for HILIC-UPLC based glycan analysis:

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Robust Glycan Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function	Application Notes
GlycoWorks RapiFluor-MS N-Glycan Kit	High-throughput glycan release, purification and labeling	Enables 96-sample processing in 3 days; critical for large studies [66]
96-well plate platform	Standardized sample processing	Reduces variability in high-throughput workflows [65]
UPLC/HPLC grade solvents	Mobile phase preparation	Minimize baseline noise and detection variability
Quality-controlled columns	Glycan separation	Multiple column lots should be tested during validation
Reference standard materials	System qualification and calibration	Essential for between-day comparability
Plasma protein samples	Method validation	Pooled samples from healthy donors recommended [65]

Based on comprehensive evaluation of separation techniques and their performance in robustness testing, HILIC-UPLC demonstrates superior characteristics for large-scale glycan analysis studies requiring long-term reliability. The technique combines high-throughput capacity with exceptional intermediate precision, evidenced by CVs below 2% for abundant glycans in extended studies [66]. While RP-UPLC provides orthogonal separation mechanisms, its tendency for co-elution of glycan classes makes it less suitable for large studies requiring precise quantification [34]. CE-LIF shows similar performance to HILIC for abundance measurements but may have limitations in throughput capacity for very large sample sets.

For researchers implementing large-scale glycan analysis studies, we recommend:

• Prioritizing HILIC-UPLC for primary analysis due to its demonstrated robustness and high-throughput capabilities
• Implementing rigorous experimental designs (e.g., Plackett-Burman) during method development to identify critical factors
• Establishing comprehensive system suitability criteria based on robustness testing results
• Incorporating periodic quality control samples throughout long-term studies to monitor method performance
• Allocating additional acceptance criteria flexibility for low-abundance glycans which naturally exhibit higher analytical variability

The remarkable robustness of modern HILIC-UPLC glycan analysis methods, capable of maintaining precision over 5-month periods across multiple instruments and columns [66], provides the foundation for reliable large-scale clinical and pharmaceutical studies where data comparability across time and location is essential for valid scientific conclusions.

In the field of glycomics, where biological systems exhibit immense complexity and analytical methods involve numerous procedural steps, the reliability of research conclusions depends fundamentally on rigorous experimental design. For researchers and drug development professionals evaluating glycan analysis platforms such as HILIC-UPLC, understanding and controlling sources of variation is not merely a methodological preference but a scientific necessity. High-throughput glycomics studies enable the identification of aberrant glycosylation patterns in diseases and provide crucial information about the functional relevance of individual glycans through genome-wide association studies [67]. However, these studies generate massive datasets that must be qualified in terms of quality parameters such as signal intensities, noise, and potential contaminations [68]. The central challenge lies in distinguishing biologically significant variations from methodological artifacts—a challenge that demands sophisticated experimental design strategies.

Among these strategies, Plackett-Burman designs have emerged as powerful screening tools for identifying critical factors affecting analytical performance. These designs enable researchers to efficiently probe numerous potential influences on results when experimental resources and time are constrained [69]. In the context of glycan analysis, where sample preparation involves multiple steps—from IgG isolation and glycan release to labeling and purification—the ability to identify which parameters most significantly impact result quality is invaluable for method optimization and validation [68]. This guide examines the application of these experimental design principles specifically for comparing HILIC-UPLC with alternative glycan analysis methods, providing a framework for robust technique evaluation in pharmaceutical development contexts.

Understanding Plackett-Burman Designs: Principles and Applications

Fundamental Concepts

Plackett-Burman designs represent a specific type of two-level fractional factorial design developed by statisticians Robin Plackett and J.P. Burman in the 1940s [69]. These designs belong to the broader family of screening designs whose primary purpose is to efficiently identify the "vital few" influential factors from a larger set of potential variables that could affect a process or analytical outcome. The fundamental principle behind these designs is their economical examination of factors, allowing researchers to study up to k = N-1 factors using only N experimental runs, where N is a multiple of 4 [69] [70].

These designs function as Resolution III designs, meaning that while main effects are not confounded with other main effects, they are aliased with two-factor interactions [69]. This characteristic makes Plackett-Burman designs particularly suitable for initial screening phases where the primary objective is identifying significant main effects rather than quantifying complex interactions between factors. The designs are constructed using a specific matrix of +1 and -1 values representing high and low factor levels, with careful attention to balancing and randomization to ensure statistical validity [69].

Advantages Over Alternative Approaches

The principal advantage of Plackett-Burman designs lies in their exceptional efficiency when dealing with processes involving numerous potential variables. Traditional "one-factor-at-a-time" (OFAT) approaches become prohibitively resource-intensive as the number of factors increases. For instance, classical OFAT screening of 11 factors would require 2,048 experiments for complete evaluation—a practically infeasible scenario for most research settings, especially when dealing with time-consuming and costly analytical methods like glycan analysis [65]. In contrast, a Plackett-Burman design can screen the same 11 factors using only 12 properly structured experimental runs [71] [65].

This efficiency makes Plackett-Burman designs particularly valuable in method development and validation contexts, where they can be employed to:

• Identify critical steps in complex analytical procedures that contribute most significantly to variability
• Focus optimization efforts on factors that truly impact analytical outcomes
• Establish method robustness by understanding how deliberate variations in parameters affect results
• Reduce long-term costs by highlighting which procedural steps require strict control and which allow for greater flexibility [68]

Application in Glycan Analysis: A Framework for Method Comparison

Experimental Design for HILIC-UPLC Method Validation

In HILIC-UPLC glycan analysis, sample preparation involves multiple critical steps where variations can significantly impact the final chromatographic results. To systematically evaluate these factors, researchers can employ Plackett-Burman designs to test multiple parameters simultaneously. In one documented application, 11 different factors were screened using a 12-run Plackett-Burman design to test the robustness of an HPLC-based high-throughput glycan analysis method [65]. The factors investigated included both chemical and procedural parameters: concentration of dithiotreitol (DTT) for protein reduction, amount of IgG used, concentration of ammonium bicarbonate, incubation time for protein denaturation, amount of peptide-N-glycosidase F (PNGase F) enzyme used, incubation time for glycan release, amount of 2-AB label used, amount of sodium cyanoborohydride, incubation time for labeling, and the amount of glycoprotein used [65].

The experimental workflow for such an investigation typically begins with IgG isolation from plasma or serum using protein G-based purification in 96-well plate format [68]. Following isolation, the N-glycan release and labeling process is performed, during which the various factors are systematically varied according to the Plackett-Burman design matrix. The released and labeled glycans are then purified before UPLC analysis using HILIC separation on instruments such as the Waters Acquity H-class UPLC with fluorescence detection [68]. The resulting chromatographic data provides the response variables for evaluating factor effects—typically the relative percentages of individual glycan peaks or groups.

The application of Plackett-Burman designs in glycan analysis has revealed several critical factors that significantly influence result variability. In robustness testing of HPLC-based plasma N-glycan analysis, the time of protein exposure to the reducing agent (dithiotreitol) emerged as the most critical parameter affecting glycan quantification [65]. This finding highlights the importance of standardizing reduction conditions across samples in comparative studies. Additionally, research has demonstrated that the amount of PNGase F enzyme used for glycan release could be reduced by up to 50% without significantly impacting results—an important optimization for cost-effective high-throughput analysis [65].

Beyond identifying critical factors, Plackett-Burman designs enable a comprehensive analysis of sources of variation throughout the analytical workflow. Some steps in sample preparation inherently contribute more variance and therefore decrease method precision. As noted in methodological guidelines, "It is often difficult to identify the critical steps, and Plackett-Burman screening design has its limitations. Analysis of sources of variation by pooling samples in different steps of sample preparation can give a better insight into the most variable steps of the procedure" [68]. This approach involves evaluating variation introduced at different stages—such as pre-analytical sample handling, glycan release, labeling, and chromatographic analysis—to determine where standardization efforts should be focused.

Comparative Performance Data: HILIC-UPLC Versus Alternative Methods

Method Performance Metrics

When evaluating glycan analysis techniques using properly designed experiments, distinct performance patterns emerge between different platforms. The table below summarizes key comparative data between separation-based non-mass spectrometric methods for Fc-glycosylation profiling of an IgG biopharmaceutical:

Table 1: Comparison of separation-based methods for IgG Fc-glycosylation analysis [3]

Method	Description	Precision	Accuracy	Throughput	Sialylation Detection
HILIC(2-AB) (Reference Method)	2-AB labeling of released glycans; separation with HILIC-UPLC	Excellent	Excellent	High	Reliable
HILIC(IAB)	Labeling of released glycans with InstantAB; separation with HILIC-HPLC	Excellent	Excellent	High	Some differences observed
CE-LIF(APTS-HR1)	APTS-labeling of released glycans and separation with capillary electrophoresis	Excellent	Excellent	Moderate	Some differences observed
DSA-FACE(APTS)	DNA-sequencer-aided fluorophore-assisted carbohydrate electrophoresis	Excellent	Excellent	High	Some differences observed
HPAEC-PAD	Separation with high pH anion exchange HPLC; pulsed amperometric detection	Excellent	Excellent	Moderate	Some differences observed

This comprehensive comparison study analyzed a therapeutic antibody reference material six-fold on two different days, with special emphasis on detecting sialic acid-containing glycans [3]. While all methods demonstrated excellent precision and accuracy, notable differences emerged particularly regarding detection and quantitation of minor glycan species such as sialylated glycans.

Advantages and Limitations Across Platforms

Beyond the performance metrics captured in Table 1, each glycan analysis method exhibits distinct characteristics that influence their applicability in different research contexts:

HILIC-UPLC Advantages: The technique offers high resolution particularly suited for polar N-glycans, high sensitivity for detecting low-abundance species, strong compatibility with various detectors (including mass spectrometry and fluorescence), relatively simple sample preparation, and short analysis time making it suitable for high-throughput screening [72]. When compared directly with reversed-phase and porous graphitic carbon chromatography, HILIC provided superior peak capacity and was particularly useful for detailed analysis of complex glycan samples [6].

HILIC-UPLC Limitations: The method development process can be relatively complex, with different N-glycan structures potentially requiring optimization of various chromatographic conditions such as mobile phase pH and salt concentration [72]. HILIC columns may have shorter lifetimes due to susceptibility to salts and polar substances, and the technique is highly sensitive to moisture in samples and solvents [72]. Additionally, matrix effects in complex biological samples may impact detection sensitivity and accuracy.

Complementary Techniques: Reversed-phase chromatography (RPC) of labeled glycans showed "remarkable selectivity for sialylated glycans," though it offered generally lower retentivity and resolution compared to HILIC [6]. Porous graphitic carbon (PGC) chromatography provided "remarkable selectivities for isomeric glycans and increased retention particularly for charged glycans," representing a valuable complementary approach for specific separations [6].

Implementation Guide: Experimental Protocols and Reagent Solutions

Detailed Methodologies for Glycan Analysis

For researchers implementing Plackett-Burman designs to evaluate glycan analysis methods, the following core protocols provide a foundation for experimental comparisons:

IgG Isolation Protocol:

• Freshly prepare buffers for IgG isolation using distilled water
• Filter buffers through 0.2-μm PES filters
• Isolate IgG from blood plasma/serum using CIM Protein G 96-well plates with vacuum manifold
• Store isolated IgG at 4°C until further processing [68]

N-glycan Release and Labeling Workflow:

• Reduction: Treat samples with 0.5 M dithiotreitol (DTT)
• Alkylation: Use 100 mM iodoacetamide for alkylation
• Protein precipitation: Employ chilled acetone
• Glycan release: Utilize peptide-N-glycosidase F (PNGase F)
• Labeling: Apply 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) fluorescent label
• Purification: Remove excess label using Sephadez G-Superfine cartridges [65]

HILIC-UPLC Analysis Conditions:

• Column: Waters BEH Glycan chromatography column (100 × 2.1 mm i.d., 1.7 μm BEH particles)
• Mobile phase: 50 mM ammonium formate (pH 4.4) and acetonitrile
• Gradient: Linear gradient from 70% to 53% acetonitrile over 25 minutes
• Temperature: 60°C
• Detection: Fluorescence detection with λex = 330 nm and λem = 420 nm
• System calibration: External standard of hydrolyzed and 2-AB-labeled glucose oligomers [68]

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Key reagents and materials for glycan analysis experiments

Reagent/Material	Function	Application Notes
CIM Protein G 96-well plates	IgG isolation from plasma/serum	Enables high-throughput processing [68]
Dithiotreitol (DTT)	Protein reduction	Critical factor identified in robustness testing [65]
PNGase F	Enzymatic release of N-glycans	Amount can potentially be reduced by 50% for cost savings [65]
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent labeling of glycans	Enables detection and relative quantitation [7]
Waters BEH Glycan column	HILIC separation of labeled glycans	Provides high-resolution glycan profiling [68]
Ammonium formate buffer	Mobile phase component for HILIC	Critical for maintaining separation performance [68]

The application of Plackett-Burman experimental designs in glycan analysis method comparison provides a scientifically rigorous framework for identifying critical factors and quantifying sources of variation. Through systematic screening of multiple parameters, researchers can determine which procedural elements require strict control and which offer flexibility for optimization. The comparative data reveals that while HILIC-UPLC offers excellent precision, accuracy, and throughput for routine glycan profiling, complementary techniques may provide advantages for specific applications such as sialylation detection or isomer separation.

For drug development professionals, these methodological insights translate into practical strategic implications. First, investment in method robustness testing during development phases pays significant dividends in long-term reliability and cost-effectiveness. Second, understanding technique-specific limitations enables appropriate method selection based on analytical priorities—whether throughput, sensitivity, or specific structural discrimination. Finally, recognition of critical control points in sample processing ensures consistent data quality across studies and laboratories. As glycan analysis continues to evolve as a critical component of biopharmaceutical characterization, systematic experimental design approaches will remain essential for generating reliable, reproducible, and biologically meaningful results.

In the evolving field of glycomics, the shift toward high-throughput analysis has introduced unprecedented capabilities for processing thousands of samples in studies ranging from clinical trials to biopharmaceutical development. This scalability, however, brings formidable data quality challenges. High-throughput studies generate large amounts of data that must be properly assessed in terms of quality, including signal intensities, noise, and potential contaminations [68]. Effective data quality control is not merely a supplementary step but a fundamental requirement for producing biologically and clinically meaningful results without introducing false correlations.

This guide objectively compares how different glycan analysis platforms implement automated integration and statistical procedures to ensure data reliability. As the field progresses, the validation of these high-throughput experiments, while time-consuming, provides benefits that far outweigh the costs by identifying influential factors that significantly improve statistical outcomes and reduce long-term experimental expenses [68].

Comparative Platform Analysis: Data Quality Control Capabilities

The table below summarizes the key data quality control features, advantages, and limitations of major analytical platforms used in high-throughput glycomics:

Table 1: Comparison of Glycan Analysis Platforms for High-Throughput Data Quality Control

Analytical Platform	Automated Integration Capabilities	Key Strengths for QC	Primary Limitations	Throughput Capacity
HILIC-UPLC	Empower software with automatic peak integration and calibration [68]	High robustness, excellent precision for major glycans [3]	Limited sialylated glycan detection [3]	High (96-well plate format) [68]
HILIC-UPLC-FLR-ESI-MS/MS	Glycan assignment via GU values, m/z, and MS/MS sequencing [30]	Provides structural confirmation alongside quantification [30]	More complex data analysis requirements	Medium-High
MALDI-TOF-MS	Rapid automated spectra processing with internal standard normalization [53]	Extreme speed (seconds/sample), high-throughput (192 samples) [53]	Challenges with quantitative accuracy without internal standards [53]	Very High (96-well plate compatible) [53]
Capillary Electrophoresis (CE)	Varies by platform (e.g., MS-DIAL for data deconvolution) [73]	Good precision, complementary coverage to HILIC [73] [3]	Lower performance for sialic acid detection vs. HILIC [3]	High (multiplexing capable) [3]

Experimental Protocols for Quality Control Implementation

HILIC-UPLC Method Validation Protocol

For HILIC-UPLC analysis of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and total plasma N-glycome, implementing rigorous validation procedures is essential for reliable high-throughput data:

• Experimental Design and Randomization: Process samples in randomized batches (typically 96-well plates) to account for batch effects from buffer differences, solution variations, or analyst performance. Include appropriate control samples across all batches [68].
• Between-Day and Between-Analyst Validation: Prepare and analyze 5-8 replicates over several days to assess method robustness. This identifies additional variability factors that emerge when scaling from tens to thousands of samples [68].
• Chromatographic Analysis: Separate fluorescently labeled N-glycans using a Waters BEH Glycan chromatography column (100 × 2.1 mm i.d., 1.7 µm BEH particles) on an Acquity H-class UPLC instrument. Maintain column temperature at 60°C. Calibrate the system using an external standard of hydrolyzed and 2-AB-labeled glucose oligomers to assign glucose unit (GU) values to each peak [68].
• Data Processing and Quality Control: Apply automatic integration followed by manual curation to verify peak assignment. Use statistical quality control procedures to flag outliers based on peak shape, retention time, and total area. Employ mixed models (e.g., lmer function in R) to account for both fixed effects (age, sex) and random effects (batch, plate position) [68].

MALDI-TOF-MS with Internal Standardization Protocol

A recently developed high-throughput approach addresses quantitative limitations in MALDI-TOF-MS through comprehensive internal standardization:

• Internal Standard Preparation: Create a full glycome internal standard library using reductive isotope labeling, increasing mass by 3 Da compared to native glycans. This library shares identical compositions and similar relative abundances with target analytes [53].
• High-Throughput Purification: Utilize Sepharose CL-4B HILIC beads in 96-well plates for glycan purification and enrichment, enabling full automation on liquid handling robotic workstations [53].
• Rapid Analysis: Acquire MALDI-TOF-MS spectra with each sample measurement completed within seconds. Process data automatically to generate quantitative results within approximately one hour [53].
• Precision Assessment: Validate method repeatability through six replicate analyses in a single day (CV 6.44-12.73%) and intermediate precision across three days (CV 8.93-12.83%). Even low-abundance glycans (0.2%) demonstrate good repeatability (CV 7.5%) [53].
• Linearity Verification: Establish linear response across a 75-fold concentration gradient (R² > 0.99), enabling accurate quantification of glycan species [53].

Robustness Testing Using Experimental Design

Identify critical methodological variables through structured experimental design:

• Plackett-Burman Screening: Employ this design during method development to detect main effects of various factors with fewer experiments than complete factorial designs [68].
• Analysis of Sources of Variation: Identify critical steps in sample preparation by pooling samples at different stages of the procedure and analyzing the contribution of each step to total variance [68].

Visualization of Quality Control Workflows

HILIC-UPLC-FLR-ESI-MS/MS Quality Control Pathway

High-Throughput MALDI-TOF-MS QC with Internal Standards

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for High-Throughput Glycan Analysis Quality Control

Reagent/Material	Function in Quality Control	Application Notes
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent labeling for detection and relative quantification	Enables fluorescence detection and UPLC separation; provides stoichiometric labeling (one label per glycan) [3] [30]
Full Glycome Internal Standard Library	Normalization for quantitative accuracy in MALDI-TOF-MS	Isotope-labeled glycans (3 Da heavier) matching native glycan compositions; corrects for technical variation [53]
Sepharose CL-4B HILIC Beads	High-throughput glycan purification in 96-well format	Replaces cotton HILIC SPE; enables automation and increases throughput [53]
BEH Glycan Chromatography Column	HILIC separation with 1.7µm particles	Provides robust, high-resolution separation of labeled glycans; withstands UPLC pressures [68]
Glucose Oligomer Standard	System calibration and GU value assignment	Enables peak identification based on glucose unit values across batches [68]
SALSA Reagents	Sialic acid linkage-specific derivatization	Stabilizes and differentiates sialic acid linkages via lactone ring-opening aminolysis [9]

Effective data quality control in high-throughput glycomics requires a platform-specific approach that integrates automated processing with statistical rigor. HILIC-UPLC remains a cornerstone for its robust separation and precision, particularly when enhanced with FLR-ESI-MS/MS for structural confirmation [3] [30]. The emerging MALDI-TOF-MS with internal standardization offers unparalleled throughput for applications requiring rapid screening, such as clone selection and batch consistency testing [53].

Successful implementation requires understanding that quality control is not a one-size-fits-all process but a strategic framework that must be tailored to each platform's strengths and limitations. By implementing the automated integration and statistical procedures outlined in this guide, researchers can achieve the reliability demanded by modern glycomics research and biopharmaceutical development.

Head-to-Head Method Comparison: Precision, Accuracy, and Application-Based Selection Criteria

Glycosylation is a critical quality attribute of biopharmaceuticals, influencing therapeutic efficacy, stability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity [3] [33]. Monitoring and controlling glycosylation during bioprocess development and manufacturing requires analytical methods that are precise, accurate, and robust. This guide objectively compares three principal separation-based techniques for glycan analysis: Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography-Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HILIC-UPLC), Capillary Electrophoresis with Laser-Induced Fluorescence (CE-LIF), and High-Performance Anion-Exchange Chromatography with Pulsed Amperometric Detection (HPAEC-PAD). The comparison is framed within a broader research thesis evaluating HILIC-UPLC against alternative methods, providing scientists and drug development professionals with experimental data to inform analytical strategy decisions.

Comparative Performance Metrics

A comprehensive study analyzing a therapeutic antibody reference material provides direct comparative data on method performance. The study involved six-fold analysis on two different days to assess precision and accuracy, with HILIC-UPLC of 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB)-labeled glycans serving as the reference method [3].

Table 1: Comparative Performance Metrics for Glycan Analysis Methods

Method	Precision (CV)	Accuracy	Key Strengths	Key Limitations
HILIC-UPLC	Excellent [3]	Excellent [3]	High resolution and peak capacity; Excellent for complex mixtures; High sensitivity and throughput [3] [72]	Complex method development; Shorter column lifetime; Sensitive to moisture [72]
CE-LIF	Excellent [3]	Excellent (for neutral glycans) [3]	Very high separation efficiency; Small sample volume requirements; Rapid analysis time [74] [33]	Limited detection of sialylated tetraantennary glycans (co-migration with dye); Requires derivative labeling [33]
HPAEC-PAD	Excellent [3]	Excellent [3]	Analysis of underivatized glycans; High selectivity for carbohydrates; No labeling required [75] [76]	Long analysis time; Poorer reproducibility and sensitivity vs. other methods; Requires specialized instrumentation [74] [76]

Table 2: Application-Based Suitability of Glycan Analysis Methods

Analytical Requirement	Recommended Method	Supporting Evidence
High-Throughput Profiling	HILIC-UPLC	Provides short analysis time and is suitable for high-throughput screening [72].
Detection of Sialylated Glycans	HILIC-UPLC	Superior for identifying and quantifying low-abundance sialylated species, which may be missed by CE-LIF [3] [33].
Analysis of Underivatized Glycans	HPAEC-PAD	Allows for direct detection of native, released glycans without the need for fluorescent labeling [3] [76].
High-Resolution Separation of Isomers	CE-LIF	Offers high separation selectivity and efficiencies, allowing the effective resolution of glycan isomers [74].
Monosaccharide Compositional Analysis	CE-LIF (at high pH)	Provides a robust and quantitative method when separation is performed at pH values above 10 [33].

Experimental Protocols for Method Comparison

The following protocols are derived from the standardized procedures used in the comparative study, which ensured a fair evaluation across different platforms and laboratories [3].

Sample Preparation and Glycan Release

• Denaturation: Dilute the purified monoclonal antibody (mAb) to a concentration of 1-2 mg/mL using a denaturation buffer (e.g., 1-2% SDS, 100 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0). Heat the mixture at 65°C for 10 minutes.
• Enzymatic Release: Add Peptide-N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) to the denatured sample to enzymatically release N-linked glycans. Incubate the mixture at 37°C for 18 hours [74] [33].
• Glycan Purification: Isolate the released glycans from the protein and buffer components using solid-phase extraction (SPE) with graphitized carbon cartridges or hydrophilic filters. Elute glycans with a suitable solvent, such as acetonitrile (ACN) in water, and dry the eluate under vacuum.

Fluorescent Labeling for HILIC-UPLC and CE-LIF

• HILIC-UPLC Labeling (2-AB): Resuspend the purified glycans in a solution of 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) in acetic acid and sodium cyanoborohydride in dimethyl sulfoxide. Incubate the labeling mixture at 65°C for 2-3 hours [3] [33].
• CE-LIF Labeling (APTS): Resuspend the purified glycans in a solution of 8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid (APTS) in acetic acid and sodium cyanoborohydride. Incubate the labeling mixture. Note that labeling times can vary from 1 hour (rapid labeling) to 4-24 hours (conventional labeling) [3].
• Clean-up: Remove excess label from the labeled glycans using SPE or membrane filters before analysis.

Instrumental Analysis

• HILIC-UPLC Analysis:

  • Column: Employ a dedicated HILIC-UPLC column (e.g., BEH Glycan or similar).
  • Mobile Phase: Use a gradient from a high organic content (e.g., 75-80% ACN) to an aqueous buffer (e.g., 50-100 mM ammonium formate, pH 4.5).
  • Detection: Utilize fluorescence detection (e.g., Ex: 330 nm, Em: 420 nm for 2-AB) [3] [15] [33].

• CE-LIF Analysis:

  • Capillary: Use a bare fused-silica capillary.
  • Background Electrolyte (BGE): Apply a borate-based buffer (pH 9.5-10.5) or a commercial gel separation buffer.
  • Separation: Perform electrophoresis with an applied voltage of 15-30 kV.
  • Detection: Use Laser-Induced Fluorescence detection with appropriate settings (e.g., a 488 nm laser and 520 nm emission filter for APTS-labeled glycans) [3] [77] [33].

• HPAEC-PAD Analysis:

  • Column: Use a strong anion-exchange column (e.g., CarboPac PA1 or PA100).
  • Eluent: Employ a gradient of sodium hydroxide and sodium acetate in water.
  • Detection: Utilize Pulsed Amperometric Detection with a standardized carbohydrate waveform [3] [76].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful execution of glycan analysis requires specific reagents and instruments. The following table details key solutions used in the featured experiments.

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Instruments for Glycan Analysis

Item Name	Function/Application	Examples/Specifications
PNGase F	Enzyme for releasing N-linked glycans from glycoproteins.	Peptide-N-Glycosidase F from Elizabethkingia miricola [74].
Fluorescent Labels (2-AB, APTS)	Derivatization of released glycans to enable detection.	2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB) for HILIC; 8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid (APTS) for CE-LIF [3] [33].
HILIC-UPLC Column	Stationary phase for separating labeled glycans by hydrophilicity.	Ultra-high performance columns with sub-2µm particles (e.g., Waters ACQUITY UPLC BEH Glycan) [3] [15].
CE-LIF Capillary & Buffer	System for electrophoretic separation of charged, labeled glycans.	Bare fused-silica capillary; Borate-based or commercial gel buffer at high pH (e.g., pH 10.5) [3] [33].
HPAEC-PAD System	Integrated system for separating and detecting underivatized glycans.	Dionex ICS systems with Gold working electrode; CarboPac guard and analytical columns [76].
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) Cartridges	Purification and desalting of released glycans before analysis.	Graphitized carbon cartridges or hydrophilic filters [74].

This comparison demonstrates that HILIC-UPLC, CE-LIF, and HPAEC-PAD all offer excellent precision and accuracy for glycan analysis of therapeutic antibodies, making them viable for biopharmaceutical development [3]. The choice of method, however, depends heavily on the specific analytical needs.

• HILIC-UPLC emerges as the most advantageous platform for high-throughput, comprehensive glycan profiling due to its superior resolution, sensitivity, and ability to detect a wide variety of glycans, including sialylated species [3] [72] [33].
• CE-LIF is a powerful technique offering high separation efficiency and speed, ideal for analyzing neutral glycans and monosaccharide composition. Its limitations in resolving certain sialylated glycans must be considered [74] [33].
• HPAEC-PAD provides a unique capability to analyze underivatized glycans, avoiding potential labeling biases, though it can be less sensitive and have longer run times than the other techniques [3] [74] [76].

Selecting the right analytical method is crucial to ensuring the consistency, efficacy, and safety of therapeutic glycoproteins. This guide provides the critical performance data and experimental context needed to make an informed decision.

The glycosylation of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is a critical quality attribute (CQA) that significantly impacts their therapeutic efficacy, safety, and stability [52]. Unlike proteins with a direct genomic blueprint, glycans are synthesized through complex enzymatic processes that result in heterogeneous mixtures of glycoforms [78]. This heterogeneity presents a substantial analytical challenge, as no single method can comprehensively characterize the entire glycan profile. Consequently, the biopharmaceutical industry increasingly relies on orthogonal analytical methodologies that leverage different physical principles to provide complementary data [52]. This comparative guide examines how Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography with Fluorescence Detection (HILIC-FLD), High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry (HRMS), and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy function as complementary techniques for thorough glycan characterization. By combining their respective strengths, scientists can achieve unprecedented confidence in glycan analysis, which is particularly crucial for biosimilar development and quality control where demonstrating analytical comparability is required for regulatory approval [52].

Methodological Principles and Experimental Protocols

HILIC-FLD: The Conventional Quantitation Workhorse

The HILIC-FLD method serves as the conventional reference technique for quantitative glycan profiling due to its robustness and reliability [3]. The standard protocol involves multiple steps: released N-glycans are labeled with a fluorophore such as 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) and separated based on their hydrophilicity [52] [78].

Detailed HILIC-FLD Protocol (adapted from [52]):

• Buffer Exchange: mAb samples are buffer-exchanged using a 10-kDa molecular weight cut-off (MWCO) filter.
• Enzymatic Release: N-Glycans are cleaved from the protein backbone using PNGase F enzyme.
• Fluorescent Labeling: Released glycans are labeled with 2-AB via reductive amination.
• Purification: The labeled glycans are purified using a HILIC solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridge to remove excess dye.
• Chromatographic Separation: The purified glycans are separated on a HILIC column (e.g., Waters Acquity BEH Amide, 2.1 × 150 mm, 1.7 µm) using a gradient of increasing aqueous content in an acetonitrile-based mobile phase.
• Detection & Quantitation: Glycans are detected by fluorescence (excitation 330 nm, emission 420 nm), and relative abundances are calculated based on peak areas relative to the total glycan peak area [52].

HRMS: Structural Elucidation with High Precision

HRMS provides accurate mass measurements, enabling detailed structural characterization. Two primary HRMS workflows are employed: released glycan analysis and glycopeptide analysis via the Multi-Attribute Method (MAM) [52].

Detailed HRMS Glycopeptide Analysis (MAM) Protocol (adapted from [52]):

• Reduction and Alkylation: The mAb is reduced with dithiothreitol (DTT) and alkylated with iodoacetic acid (IAA).
• Desalting: The sample is desalted using Zeba spin columns with 100 mM ammonium bicarbonate buffer.
• Trypsin Digestion: The protein is digested with trypsin (1:10 enzyme-to-substrate ratio) at 37°C for 30 minutes.
• LC-MS Analysis: Tryptic peptides are separated by liquid chromatography and analyzed on a high-resolution mass spectrometer (e.g., Thermo Q Exactive hybrid quadrupole-Orbitrap).
• Data Processing: Product quality attributes (PQAs), including glycosylation, are identified and quantified using dedicated software (e.g., Thermo Chromeleon) that calculates relative abundances from the area under the curve of specific m/z peaks [52].

NMR: Unique Insights into Monosaccharide Composition

NMR spectroscopy offers a unique approach by generating monosaccharide fingerprints that indirectly inform about the glycan distribution profile [52]. A middle-down NMR approach can be employed where the Fc and Fab domains of the mAb are separated, followed by urea denaturation of the Fc domain [52]. In the resulting NMR spectra, each monosaccharide produces a distinct peak that can be identified and quantified, providing a complementary perspective to chromatographic and mass spectrometric methods.

Comparative Performance Data and Technical Characteristics

The orthogonal application of HILIC-FLD, HRMS, and NMR to the same set of mAb samples reveals their complementary nature, with each technique providing unique advantages for specific aspects of glycan characterization [52].

Table 1: Technical Comparison of Orthogonal Glycan Analysis Methods

Characteristic	HILIC-FLD	HRMS (Released Glycans)	HRMS (Glycopeptide/MAM)	NMR (Middle-Down)
Primary Role	High-precision quantitation of major glycoforms [52]	Mass confirmation and identification of glycan structures [52]	Site-specific glycosylation analysis and multi-attribute monitoring [52] [78]	Monosaccharide fingerprinting and quantification [52]
Measured Output	Relative fluorescence peak area [52]	Accurate mass (m/z) [52]	Accurate mass (m/z) of peptides and glycopeptides [52]	Chemical shift (ppm) [52]
Quantitation Basis	Relative peak area (%) [52]	Relative abundance from peak areas [52]	Relative abundance from peak areas [52]	Relative peak area/integration [52]
Key Advantage	Robust, reproducible quantification [3]	High specificity and sensitivity [52]	Site-specific information; simultaneous monitoring of other PTMs [52]	Provides structural insights not available from LC/MS [52]
Key Limitation	Limited structural information; requires labeling [52]	Can be complex with extensive sample preparation [52]	Does not monitor intact glycan distribution [52]	Cannot resolve specific glycan moieties (e.g., FA2) [52]

Table 2: Typical Glycan Abundance (%) Reported by Different Methods for a Model mAb (Rituximab) [52]

Glycan Species	HILIC-FLD	HRMS (Intact Mass)	HRMS (MAM)
G0F	~65%	~67%	~66%
G1F	~20%	~18%	~21%
G2F	~5%	~4%	~5%
Man5	~3%	~3%	~3%

The data in Table 2 demonstrates strong agreement across all methods for major glycoforms, reinforcing confidence in glycan characterization when orthogonal approaches yield consistent results [52].

Integrated Workflows and Synergistic Applications

The true power of these techniques is realized when they are integrated into a single, comprehensive analytical strategy. The synergistic relationship between HILIC-FLD, HRMS, and NMR creates a characterization toolkit where the limitations of one method are addressed by the strengths of another.

This integrated approach is particularly valuable for biosimilar development. A 2024 study compared an FDA-approved innovator product (Rituxan) with a foreign-sourced product (Reditux) using this panel of methods [52]. The multi-technique analysis provided comprehensive evidence of product similarity or differences, which is essential for meeting regulatory standards for biosimilar approval [52]. Furthermore, HILIC-FLD and HRMS can be directly hyphenated in the form of HILIC-FLD-ESI-MS/MS, where the fluorescence detector provides quantitative data and the mass spectrometer simultaneously provides structural identification from a single injection [30].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of these orthogonal methods relies on specific, high-quality reagents and materials. The following table details key components required for a comprehensive glycan analysis workflow.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Orthogonal Glycan Analysis

Reagent / Material	Primary Function	Application Notes
PNGase F Enzyme	Enzymatically releases N-glycans from the glycoprotein backbone [52] [79]	Critical first step for released glycan analysis (HILIC-FLD, HRMS of glycans) [52]
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent dye for labeling released glycans for detection in HILIC-FLD [52] [78]	Considered a reference label for HILIC profiling; enables sensitive fluorescence detection [3]
RapiFluor-MS (RFMS)	Advanced fluorescent tag designed for rapid labeling and improved MS sensitivity [52] [79]	Reduces sample preparation time and enhances ionization efficiency for HRMS [52]
HILIC SPE µ-Elution Plate	Micro-elution solid-phase extraction plate for purifying labeled glycans [78] [79]	Used to remove excess labeling dye and salts after the fluorophore tagging reaction [78]
Trypsin Protease	Proteolytic enzyme for digesting mAbs into peptides for MAM analysis [52]	Enables site-specific glycosylation analysis and simultaneous monitoring of other PTMs [52]
IdeS (FabRICATOR) Enzyme	Protease that cleaves IgG below the hinge region, generating Fc/2 and F(ab')2 fragments [78]	Used for "middle-up" analysis, allowing separation of Fc glycans from Fab glycans [78]
Dithiothreitol (DTT)	Reducing agent for breaking disulfide bonds in proteins [52]	Used in sample preparation for both MAM (peptide level) and middle-up analysis (subunit level) [52]

The orthogonal application of HILIC-FLD, HRMS, and NMR spectroscopy represents the current state-of-the-art for confident characterization of therapeutic antibody glycosylation. While HILIC-FLD provides robust quantitative data, HRMS adds specificity and structural confirmation, and NMR offers a unique orthogonal perspective on monosaccharide composition. The synergy between these methods creates a powerful toolkit for the biopharmaceutical industry, enabling comprehensive analysis that is greater than the sum of its parts. As the demand for biosimilars and complex biotherapeutics continues to grow, this multi-faceted analytical strategy will be indispensable for ensuring product quality, safety, and efficacy throughout the product lifecycle.

The separation of isomeric glycans and glycopeptides is a critical challenge in analytical science, directly impacting the characterization of biopharmaceuticals and disease biomarkers. This guide provides a systematic comparison of two prominent chromatographic techniques—Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography (HILIC-UPLC) and Porous Graphitized Carbon (PGC) chromatography—for resolving structurally similar isomers. By evaluating performance metrics, underlying separation mechanisms, and experimental applications across recently published studies, we present an objective framework to guide researchers in selecting the appropriate methodology based on their specific resolution requirements, throughput needs, and sample complexity.

Protein glycosylation represents one of the most significant and complex post-translational modifications, with alterations in glycosylation patterns affecting biological processes ranging from protein folding to host-pathogen interactions [80]. The structural diversity of glycans arises not only from their composition but also from numerous isomeric forms differing in linkage position, branching patterns, and monosaccharide stereochemistry. These subtle structural differences can profoundly impact biological function and serve as critical biomarkers for diseases including cancer, inflammatory conditions, and neurodegenerative disorders [81].

The resolution of these isomeric structures presents a substantial analytical challenge due to their nearly identical masses and similar physicochemical properties. Among separation techniques, HILIC-UPLC and PGC chromatography have emerged as powerful tools with complementary strengths. HILIC separates polar compounds through hydrophilic partitioning and other secondary interactions, while PGC employs a unique retention mechanism based on both hydrophobic and polar interactions with its flat graphitic surface [48]. Understanding their distinct capabilities is essential for advancing glycomics and glycoproteomics research, particularly in biopharmaceutical development where glycosylation is a Critical Quality Attribute (CQA) for therapeutic proteins like monoclonal antibodies [17].

Separation Mechanisms and Technical Principles

HILIC-UPLC Separation Mechanism

HILIC operates on a mixed-mode retention mechanism where separation primarily occurs through partitioning of analytes between an organic-rich mobile phase (typically acetonitrile) and a water-enriched layer immobilized on the surface of the stationary phase [48]. This hydrophilic partitioning is complemented by secondary interactions including hydrogen bonding, dipole-dipole interactions, and electrostatic effects [80] [48]. Retention increases with glycan polarity, with larger, more polar glycans typically eluting later in the gradient [80].

The selectivity of HILIC separations varies significantly with stationary phase chemistry. Common HILIC phases include:

• Penta-HILIC: Features proprietary bonding chemistry with five hydroxyl groups, demonstrating excellent separation for complex glycopeptides [80].
• BEH Amide: Based on ethylene bridged hybrid technology with trifunctionally-bonded amide phase, offering robust separations with different selectivity [80].
• ZIC-HILIC: Contains zwitterionic sulfobetaine functional groups that can cause electrostatic repulsion with negatively charged sialic acids, reducing retention for sialylated species [80].

PGC Separation Mechanism

PGC employs a fundamentally different retention mechanism based on its highly ordered, flat graphitic surface. Retention arises from a combination of dispersive (hydrophobic) interactions between the analyte and the polarizable graphite sheets, and charge-induced interactions of polar analytes with the carbon surface [48]. This dual retention mechanism enables PGC to resolve isomeric structures that co-elute in other chromatographic modes, as subtle differences in molecular shape and orientation on the flat carbon surface affect retention [82].

The exceptional isomer separation capability of PGC stems from its ability to discriminate structural differences including:

• Glycosidic linkage position (α1-3 vs. α1-6)
• Monosaccharide stereochemistry (e.g., galactose vs. glucose)
• Branching patterns in complex N-glycans
• Sialic acid linkages (α2-3 vs. α2-6)

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of HILIC-UPLC and PGC Chromatography

Characteristic	HILIC-UPLC	PGC Chromatography
Primary Retention Mechanism	Hydrophilic partitioning into water-enriched layer	Dispersive interactions + charge-induced polar interactions
Stationary Phase	Functionalized silica (e.g., amide, diol, zwitterionic)	Porous graphitized carbon
Mobile Phase	High acetonitrile content with aqueous buffer	Water-acetonitrile with formic acid or other modifiers
Typical Elution Order	Increasing polarity/size	Complex, based on molecular orientation and polarity
Key Secondary Interactions	Hydrogen bonding, electrostatic, dipole-dipole	Electronic interactions with flat carbon surface

Comparative Performance Analysis

Isomer Separation Capabilities

Recent studies directly comparing HILIC and PGC reveal distinct performance profiles for isomer separation. In glycopeptide analysis, HILIC has demonstrated particular effectiveness in separating fucosylated and sialylated glycoforms. A 2020 systematic comparison of HILIC stationary phases found that HALO penta-HILIC provided the best separation results for hemopexin and Immunoglobulin G glycopeptides, successfully resolving isomeric glycoforms differing in fucosylation and sialylation patterns [80]. The study noted that ZIC-HILIC performed poorly for sialylated glycopeptides due to electrostatic repulsion between negatively charged sialic acids and the zwitterionic stationary phase [80].

PGC chromatography exhibits superior capabilities for separating linkage isomers and structurally similar glycans. A 2024 study demonstrated that a 1 cm long mesoporous graphitized carbon (MGC) column efficiently separated both N- and O-glycopeptide isomers, maintaining high reproducibility over three months with an average retention time shift of only 1 minute [81]. The exceptional isomer resolution of PGC was further highlighted in a study of fucosylated N-glycans, where ultra-high temperature PGC (190°C) enabled separation of four synthetic Lewis antigen isomers and generated diagnostic ions for predicting terminal linkage and arm specificity [83].

Analytical Performance Metrics

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Comparison of HILIC-UPLC and PGC Chromatography

Performance Metric	HILIC-UPLC	PGC Chromatography	Experimental Context
Retention Time Window	17-34 min (HALO penta-HILIC for hemopexin) [80]	39-44 min (ZIC-HILIC for hemopexin) [80]	Hemopexin glycopeptides separation
Analysis Time	~30 min (conventional) [80]	~120 min (comprehensive isomer separation) [81]	Glycopeptide isomer separation
Retention Time Stability	Not specifically reported	1 min average shift over 3 months [81]	MGC column reproducibility study
Peak Capacity	High (superior to RPC) [6]	High with UHT enhancement (10 min gradient at 190°C) [83]	Nonreduced dextran ladder separation
Sialylated Species Retention	Increased retention with sialic acid addition [80]	Decreased retention for sialylated species in ZIC-HILIC [80]	Electrostatic repulsion effects

Throughput and Practical Considerations

For high-throughput applications, HILIC-UPLC offers significant advantages in analysis time and method robustness. In large-scale clinical studies analyzing IgG N-glycans from 1201 individuals, UPLC-FLR provided slightly stronger genetic associations than MS-based methods at the expense of lower throughput [84]. Recent advancements have further improved HILIC throughput, with rapid 2-AB methods reducing testing time from days to minutes while cutting sample requirements from milligrams to micrograms [17].

PGC methods typically require longer analysis times but provide unparalleled structural information. The comprehensive separation of isomeric N- and O-glycopeptides on MGC columns employs gradient elution times of 120 minutes [81], making it more suitable for detailed characterization than high-throughput screening. However, ultra-high temperature PGC approaches have demonstrated significantly reduced analysis times while maintaining separation efficiency, with one study achieving high peak capacity with gradient elution in just 10 minutes at 190°C [83].

Experimental Methodologies

Standard HILIC-UPLC Workflow for Glycan Analysis

The typical HILIC-UPLC workflow for glycan analysis involves multiple stages from sample preparation to data analysis, with specific variations depending on the application:

Sample Preparation Protocol (based on salivary IgG N-glycome analysis [85]):

• IgG Isolation: Add 20 μL of Protein G Agarose Fast Flow beads to 0.5-5 mL of saliva or diluted plasma. Incubate for 2 hours at 800 rpm.
• Washing: Wash beads three times with 200 μL PBS and three times with 200 μL deionized water using a vacuum manifold.
• Elution: Incubate beads with 100 mM formic acid for 15 minutes at room temperature. Elute IgGs into a PCR plate containing 17 μL of 1 M ammonium bicarbonate.
• Glycan Release: Denature isolated IgG with SDS and incubate at 65°C. Release N-glycans with PNGase F (Promega) incubation.
• Fluorescent Labeling: Label with procainamide hydrochloride (ProA) in a 2-step procedure:
  • Add 25 μL procainamide mixture (4.32 mg ProA in acetic acid/DMSO 30:70), incubate at 65°C for 1 hour.
  • Add 25 μL reducing agent solution (4.48 mg 2-picoline borane in acetic acid/DMSO 30:70), incubate at 65°C for 1.5 hours.
• HILIC-UPLC Analysis: Analyze labeled glycans using HILIC-UPLC with fluorescence detection.

PGC-LC-MS/MS Workflow for Isomeric Separation

PGC-LC-MS/MS Protocol (based on isomeric glycopeptide separation [81]):

• Sample Denaturation and Reduction: Resuspend glycoproteins in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate buffer. Thermally denature at 90°C for 15 minutes. Reduce with DTT (5 mM final concentration) at 60°C for 45 minutes.
• Alkylation: Alkylate with iodoacetamide (20 mM final concentration) in the dark for 45 minutes. Quench with DTT (5 mM).
• Enzymatic Digestion: Digest with trypsin/Lys-C enzyme (1:25 w/w) at 37°C for 18 hours.
• Optional O-glycoprotease Digestion: For O-glycopeptides, further digest with IMPa O-glycoprotease (1:10 w/w) at 37°C for 18 hours.
• Desalting: Clean up released glycopeptides using offline C18 TopTip desalting procedure with conditioning, binding, and elution steps.
• PGC-LC-MS/MS Analysis: Analyze using mesoporous graphitized carbon column (1 cm long, in-house packed) at 75°C with nano-LC system coupled to mass spectrometer. Employ 120-minute gradient from water/acetonitrile/formic acid.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for HILIC and PGC Applications

Reagent/Material	Function	Example Application	Key Considerations
PNGase F	Enzymatic release of N-glycans from glycoproteins	Core component of both HILIC and PGC workflows [85]	Enzyme activity and purity critical for complete release
2-AB (2-aminobenzamide)	Fluorescent labeling for detection and retention in HILIC	Standard labeling for HILIC-UPLC-FLR [84]	Enables fluorescence detection and enhances HILIC retention
Procainamide (ProA)	Fluorescent labeling alternative to 2-AB	Used in salivary IgG N-glycan analysis by HILIC [85]	Offers sensitive detection with stable labeling
Protein G Beads	Affinity purification of IgG from biological samples	Isolation of IgG from plasma/saliva [85]	Bead capacity and specificity affect yield
Dextran Ladder	Hydrolyzed glucose polymer for retention time normalization	Internal standard for PGC retention time alignment [82]	Enables system-independent glucose unit (GU) values
Trypsin/Lys-C	Proteolytic digestion for glycopeptide analysis	Generation of glycopeptides for site-specific analysis [81]	Digestion efficiency impacts glycopeptide recovery
Mesoporous Graphitized Carbon	Stationary phase for isomer separation	Packing of nano-LC columns for glycopeptide separation [81]	Particle size and pore structure affect resolution

Application Scenarios and Selection Guidelines

Recommended Applications for HILIC-UPLC

HILIC-UPLC excels in several specific application scenarios:

• High-Throughput Glycan Profiling: When analyzing large sample sets (e.g., clinical cohorts, bioprocess monitoring) where throughput and robustness are prioritized over comprehensive isomer separation [84].
• Sialylated Glycoform Analysis: For separating sialylated glycoforms when using appropriate stationary phases (e.g., penta-HILIC, amide) that provide increased retention with sialic acid content [80].
• Routine Quality Control: In biopharmaceutical settings where monitoring known critical quality attributes requires robust, reproducible methods with minimal method development [30].
• Limited Sample Availability: When sample amounts are constrained (microgram level), as HILIC methods have been successfully adapted to low-sample workflows [17].

Recommended Applications for PGC Chromatography

PGC chromatography is particularly suited for:

• Comprehensive Isomer Characterization: When complete structural elucidation is required, particularly for linkage isomers, branching isomers, and stereoisomers that co-elute in HILIC [81] [83].
• Discovery Phase Research: During method development and biomarker discovery where unknown isomers may be present and comprehensive separation is needed [82].
• Native Glycan Analysis: When analyzing underivatized glycans, as PGC provides excellent retention and separation without requiring derivatization [83].
• Complex Biological Samples: For samples with high isomeric complexity, such as tissue lysates, cell lysates, and serum/plasma, where maximum resolution is needed [82].

Hybrid and Complementary Approaches

Emerging approaches leverage the complementary strengths of both techniques:

• Two-Dimensional LC Systems: Combining HILIC in the first dimension with PGC in the second dimension provides exceptional orthogonality for comprehensive glycome analysis [48].
• Sequential Analysis: Using HILIC for rapid screening followed by PGC for detailed characterization of specific isomeric peaks of interest.
• Method Selection Framework: The choice between HILIC and PGC should consider specific research objectives, with HILIC preferred for targeted, high-throughput analysis and PGC for comprehensive isomer separation in discovery research.

HILIC-UPLC and PGC chromatography offer complementary capabilities for the separation of isomeric glycans and glycopeptides. HILIC-UPLC provides robust, high-throughput separation with particular strength in resolving fucosylated and sialylated glycoforms, making it well-suited for routine analysis and quality control applications. PGC chromatography demonstrates superior resolution of linkage and structural isomers, enabling comprehensive characterization of complex glycan mixtures at the expense of longer analysis times. The selection between these techniques should be guided by specific research goals, throughput requirements, and the level of structural detail needed. As both technologies continue to evolve, their synergistic application through multidimensional approaches promises to further advance glycomics research and biopharmaceutical development.

In the development of biopharmaceuticals, particularly monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), the analysis of N-glycosylation is paramount. Glycans are a Critical Quality Attribute (CQA) with a profound impact on drug efficacy, safety, stability, and pharmacokinetics [17] [3]. For researchers and drug development professionals, selecting the appropriate analytical method involves a critical trade-off between the need for speed in high-throughput scenarios and the requirement for comprehensive depth in detailed characterization. This guide objectively compares rapid profiling techniques against conventional, in-depth methods, providing a framework for informed decision-making within the broader context of HILIC-UPLC and other separation sciences.

Conventional Glycan Analysis: The Gold Standard for Depth

Conventional methods for N-glycan analysis are characterized by their robustness and ability to provide detailed structural information. They often serve as reference methods against which newer, faster techniques are validated.

• The Conventional 2-AB/HILIC-UPLC Method: This method is widely considered the gold standard for glycan profiling [3]. The workflow involves enzymatic release of glycans from the glycoprotein using PNGase F, followed by fluorescent labeling with 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) via reductive amination. The labeled glycans are then purified to remove excess dye and finally analyzed using Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography with Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography and Fluorescence Detection (HILIC-UPLC-FLD) [3] [68] [10]. Its strength lies in providing excellent resolution of isomeric glycan structures and reliable relative quantification, making it a cornerstone for product characterization and release analytics.

• Comprehensive Structural Analysis with HILIC-UPLC-FLR-ESI-MS/MS: To gain deeper structural insights, the conventional HILIC profiling workflow is often extended by coupling the chromatography to electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (ESI-MS/MS) [30]. This combination provides three complementary data dimensions: fluorescence profiling for relative quantification, mass determination for compositional assignment, and MS/MS fragmentation for sequence and linkage confirmation [86] [30]. This level of analysis is crucial for definitive glycan assignment, monitoring batch-to-batch consistency, and comparability studies.

The Rise of Rapid Methods: Accelerating Development

The primary drawbacks of conventional methods are their time-consuming nature and high sample requirements, making them unsuitable for stages like cell line development where hundreds of clones need rapid screening with limited sample. Several rapid methods have been developed to address this gap [17].

• Rapid 2-AB Method: This approach utilizes optimized commercial kits (e.g., Agilent AdvanceBio Gly-X N-Glycan Prep kit) that streamline the glycan release, labeling, and purification steps. It reduces the total testing time of the conventional 2-AB method from several days to less than one day while maintaining data comparability [17].

• Subunit Analysis by LC-MS: To circumvent the challenges of analyzing intact mAbs (~150 kDa), methods analyzing smaller subunits have been developed. These include:

  • Reduction Method: Using agents like DTT or TCEP to generate heavy (~50 kDa) and light chains (~25 kDa).
  • IdeS Digestion Method: Using the enzyme IdeS to generate Fc/2 (~25 kDa) and F(ab')2 (~100 kDa) fragments [17]. These subunit analyses mitigate ion suppression and allow for better identification of paired glycoforms compared to intact analysis [17].

• 2D-LC-MS with On-Line IdeS Digestion: This represents a significant advancement in speed. It incorporates an immobilized IdeS enzyme column into a two-dimensional liquid chromatography system, enabling automated digestion and analysis. This method can complete N-glycan profiling in just minutes [17].

• High-Throughput MALDI-TOF-MS: Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry offers the fastest analysis time, capable of processing hundreds of samples within minutes [14]. When combined with a full glycome internal standard approach to improve quantitative accuracy, it becomes a powerful tool for rapid screening in quality control scenarios, such as clone selection and batch-to-batch consistency checks [14].

Head-to-Head Comparison: Quantitative Data

The following tables summarize the key performance metrics of the discussed methods, highlighting the direct trade-offs between speed and analytical depth.

Table 1: Comparison of Method Performance and Application Scope

Method	Testing Time	Sample Requirement	Key Strengths	Major Limitations
Conventional 2-AB	Several days	Milligram scale	Gold standard; high resolution of isomers; quantitative [17] [3].	Labor-intensive; slow; high sample need [17].
Rapid 2-AB	< 1 day	Microgram scale	Faster than conventional; good data comparability [17].	Less in-depth than full conventional method.
LC-MS Intact	Minutes-Hours	Microgram scale	Rapid; minimal sample prep [17].	Cannot resolve paired glycoforms; low sensitivity at high MW [17].
LC-MS (Reduction/ IdeS)	Minutes-Hours	Microgram scale	Faster than conventional; better than intact for glycoforms [17].	Requires additional digestion/reduction step.
2D-LC-MS (On-line IdeS)	Minutes	Microgram scale	Very fast and automated; low sample requirement [17].	Requires specialized instrument setup.
HILIC-UPLC-FLR-ESI-MS/MS	Hours	Microgram scale	Detailed structural information; high confidence in assignments [86] [30].	Longer run times than rapid methods.
MALDI-TOF-MS	Minutes (for hundreds of samples)	Microgram scale	Highest throughput; rapid analysis [14].	Can require internal standards for precise quantification [14].

Table 2: Comparison of Fluorescent Labels Used in HILIC-Based Glycan Analysis

Label	Fluorescence Sensitivity (vs. 2-AB)	MS Sensitivity (vs. 2-AB)	Labeling Efficiency	Key Characteristics
2-AB	1x (Baseline)	1x (Baseline)	High / Stoichiometric [10]	Widely used; "gold standard"; poor MS sensitivity [10].
Procainamide (ProA)	15x higher	2x higher	High / Stoichiometric [10]	High fluorescence and MS sensitivity; better option for sensitivity [10].
RapiFluor-MS (RF-MS)	4x higher	68x higher	High / Stoichiometric [10]	Very fast labeling (<5 min); excellent MS sensitivity [10].

Experimental Protocols for Key Methods

To ensure reproducibility and provide a clear technical overview, here are the summarized experimental protocols for a conventional method, a rapid method, and a high-throughput MS method.

• Denaturation & Release: The glycoprotein sample (typically 40-100 µg) is denatured with SDS. The detergent is then neutralized with Igepal-CA630, and N-glycans are enzymatically released by incubation with PNGase F overnight (~37°C).
• Fluorescent Labeling: Released glycans are labeled with 2-AB via reductive amination. The labeling mixture contains 2-AB and a reducing agent (e.g., 2-picoline borane) in a DMSO/acetic acid solution. The reaction is incubated at 65°C for a few hours.
• Purification: Excess fluorescent dye is removed by hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography solid-phase extraction (HILIC-SPE). The labeled glycans are retained on the SPE medium, while unincorporated dye is washed away. Glycans are then eluted in water.
• HILIC-UPLC-FLD Analysis: The purified glycans are separated on a BEH Glycan or similar HILIC column (e.g., 100 x 2.1 mm, 1.7 µm) using a gradient of ammonium formate (pH 4.4-4.5) and acetonitrile. Detection is by fluorescence (FLD).

• Rapid Processing: A commercial kit (e.g., Agilent AdvanceBio Gly-X N-Glycan Prep kit) is used. The process integrates and streamlines the denaturation, enzymatic release (with optimized PNGase F), 2-AB labeling, and cleanup steps.
• Accelerated Workflow: The kit employs optimized reagents and protocols that significantly reduce the time required for each step compared to the conventional protocol, cutting the total sample preparation time from days to under one day.

• Internal Standard Preparation: A full glycome internal standard (IS) library is prepared. This involves releasing glycans from a standard glycoprotein, then subjecting them to a one-step reductive isotope labeling reaction (e.g., generating glycans with a +3 Da mass shift).
• Sample Release and Mixing: N-glycans are released from client samples (e.g., trastuzumab) using PNGase F. The released native glycans are mixed with the prepared internal standard library.
• High-Throughput Purification: The mixture of native and IS glycans is purified and enriched using a 96-well plate compatible method, such as Sepharose HILIC-SPE, which can be automated on a liquid handling robot.
• MALDI-TOF-MS Analysis: The purified glycans are spotted onto a MALDI target plate and analyzed by MALDI-TOF-MS in positive ion mode. The internal standards allow for precise relative quantification by correcting for run-to-run variance.

Visualizing the Workflows and Trade-offs

The diagram below illustrates the procedural steps and relative time investment of conventional versus rapid glycan analysis workflows, clearly depicting the sources of time savings.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Successful glycan analysis relies on a suite of specialized reagents and materials. The following table details key solutions used in the featured experiments.

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Glycan Analysis

Reagent / Solution	Function	Example Use Case
PNGase F	Enzyme that catalyzes the cleavage of N-linked glycans from glycoproteins.	Core step in all protocols for releasing N-glycans prior to analysis [17] [10].
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent dye that labels the reducing end of glycans via reductive amination.	Conventional and rapid HILIC-UPLC-FLD profiling; provides relative quantification [17] [3] [10].
Procainamide (ProA)	Fluorescent dye with a tertiary amine tail, offering enhanced FLR and MS sensitivity.	HILIC-UPLC-FLR-MS analysis when higher sensitivity is required [10] [30].
RapiFluor-MS (RF-MS)	A rapid tagging reagent containing a fluorophore and a MS-sensitizing amine.	Ultra-fast (5 min) labeling for high-throughput HILIC-MS workflows [10].
IdeS Enzyme	Protease that specifically digests IgG antibodies below the hinge region.	Generating Fc/2 subunits for rapid LC-MS or on-line 2D-LC-MS analysis [17].
HILIC Stationary Phases	Polar chromatographic materials (e.g., BEH Amide) for separating hydrophilic analytes.	UPLC separation of labeled glycans based on size and polarity [6] [68].
Porous Graphitic Carbon (PGC)	Chromatographic material offering strong retention and isomeric separation.	LC-MS analysis for resolving challenging glycan isomers [86] [6].
Full Glycome Internal Standards	Isotope-labeled glycan library for normalization and quantification.	Enabling precise quantitative analysis in high-throughput MALDI-TOF-MS [14].

The choice between rapid and conventional glycan analysis methods is not about finding a single superior technique, but about selecting the right tool for the specific stage of biopharmaceutical development.

• For clone screening, process optimization, and other high-throughput needs, rapid methods like the rapid 2-AB kit, 2D-LC-MS, and MALDI-TOF-MS are indispensable. Their speed and lower sample consumption significantly accelerate development timelines.
• For in-depth characterization, biosimilar comparability, and establishing product CQAs, the conventional 2-AB/HILIC-UPLC method and the comprehensive HILIC-UPLC-FLR-ESI-MS/MS provide the necessary depth, resolution, and confidence in structural assignment.

An integrated strategy, often employing rapid screening followed by conventional characterization of lead candidates, represents the most efficient and informative approach for ensuring the quality, safety, and efficacy of glycosylated biopharmaceuticals.

Glycosylation is a critical quality attribute (CQA) of therapeutic proteins, influencing key characteristics including efficacy, stability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity [3] [53]. For monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), the glycosylation pattern, particularly in the Fc region, directly affects effector functions such as antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) and complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) [3] [87]. Due to its significant functional impact, glycosylation requires close monitoring during bioprocess development and routine manufacturing of biologics [3]. A wide range of analytical methods exists for glycan analysis, each with distinct strengths in throughput, level of structural detail, and resource requirements. This guide provides an objective comparison of these methods and presents a structured framework for selecting the optimal approach based on specific project needs and phases.

Comparative Performance of Glycan Analysis Methods

Key Analytical Techniques and Their Characteristics

Multiple separation-based techniques are employed for high-throughput glycosylation analysis. The choice of method depends on the required balance between throughput, sensitivity, structural information, and quantitative precision.

Table 1: Comparison of Key Glycan Analysis Methods

Method	Throughput	Precision (CV)	Structural Detail	Key Applications
HILIC-UPLC (2-AB)	Medium	Excellent (Reference Method) [3]	Glycan composition and relative quantification [3]	Product characterization, release analytics [3]
CE-LIF	High	Excellent [3]	High-resolution separation of labeled glycans [3]	High-throughput screening, process monitoring [3] [24]
HPAEC-PAD	Medium	Excellent [3]	Separation of native glycans [3]	Analysis without need for labeling [3]
MALDI-TOF-MS	Very High	~10% (with internal standard) [53]	Glycan composition (mass) [53]	Clone selection, batch-to-batch consistency [53]
HILIC-HRMS	Medium	High (enables structural characterization) [88]	Isomeric separation and structural assignment [88]	In-depth profiling for biomarker discovery [88]

Quantitative Performance and Data Output

The precision and quantitative capabilities of a method are paramount for reliable comparison. Different methods have demonstrated performance in various contexts.

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Data from Experimental Studies

Method	Experimental Context	Reported Precision (CV)	Linearity	Key Quantitative Finding
MALDI-TOF-MS with Internal Standard	Trastuzumab analysis [53]	Repeatability: 10.41% (average); Intermediate Precision: 10.78% (average) [53]	R² > 0.99 over 75-fold concentration range [53]	Enabled absolute quantification of G0F glycan [53]
HILIC-HRMS	Plasma N-glycome profiling [88]	N/A	N/A	Differentiated MS from antibody-defined diseases with 80.5% accuracy [88]
Multi-Capillary CE	High-throughput screening [24]	N/A	N/A	Allows parallel data acquisition, dramatically increasing throughput [24]

Decision Framework: Matching Methods to Project Phases

The optimal glycan analysis method varies significantly throughout the biopharmaceutical development lifecycle. Selection should be driven by the specific questions and constraints of each project phase.

Workflow and Method Selection Logic

The following diagram outlines the logical decision process for selecting an appropriate glycan analysis method based on key project requirements.

Method Application by Project Phase

• Early-Stage Development and Clone Selection: During initial screening where speed and capacity are critical for analyzing thousands of samples, MALDI-TOF-MS is ideal. A recently developed method enables analysis of at least 192 samples in a single experiment with an average CV of 10%, making it suitable for rapid clone screening and process optimization [53]. The method combines the speed of MALDI-TOF-MS (hundreds of samples in minutes) with quantitative precision through a full glycome internal-standard approach [53].

• Process Development and Optimization: As development progresses to optimizing culture conditions and media composition, CE-LIF methods provide an excellent balance of throughput and resolution. Techniques like cartridge-based capillary gel electrophoresis (CCGE) with rapid fluorescent labeling are specifically designed for screening applications [3]. Multicapillary CE systems further enhance throughput by enabling parallel data acquisition [24].

• Characterization and Comparability Studies: For comprehensive characterization, especially when comparing biosimilars to reference products, HILIC-UPLC provides robust performance with excellent precision and accuracy [3] [53]. When deeper structural information is needed, HILIC-HRMS combines high-resolution separation with mass spectrometric detection to differentiate isomeric structures and enable detailed structural assignments [88].

• Routine Quality Control and Batch Release: For established products where robustness and reliability are paramount, HILIC-UPLC of 2-AB-labeled glycans is widely accepted and validated [3] [24]. Its excellent precision and accuracy make it suitable for monitoring batch-to-batch consistency and product release [53].

Detailed Experimental Protocols

HILIC-UPLC Analysis of Released N-Glycans

This protocol is adapted from a standardized method for brain tissue N-glycans, which can be modified for therapeutic antibodies [89].

Sample Preparation:

• Denaturation: Resuspend the dried protein pellet in cold PBS. Add SDS to a final concentration of 1.3% (w/v) and β-mercaptoethanol (βME) to 0.5% (v/v) to denature proteins and reduce disulfide bonds.
• Incubation: Vortex and incubate at 95°C for 10 minutes with gentle shaking, then place on ice for 5 minutes.
• Digestion: Add NaN₃ (0.1% w/v final) and IGEPAL CA-630 (1.5% final). Add PNGase F enzyme (e.g., 5 units) and incubate overnight at 37°C to release N-glycans.
• Cleanup: Use centrifugal filter devices (e.g., Amicon Ultra) to separate released glycans from proteins. Wash repeatedly with ultrapure water, combine flow-through (which contains glycans), and dry completely [89].

Fluorescent Labeling and Cleanup:

• Labeling: Resuspend dried N-glycans in ultrapure water. Transfer to a 96-well plate for high-throughput processing. Add 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) labeling solution, seal, and incubate at 65°C for 2 hours [89].
• Purification: Use a hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) filter plate (e.g., AcroPrep GHP membrane) for cleanup. Condition plate with ethanol, water, and acetonitrile. Load samples diluted in acetonitrile. Wash with 96% acetonitrile to remove excess label.
• Elution: Elute labeled glycans with ultrapure water into a collection plate via centrifugation [89].

HILIC-UPLC Analysis:

• Column: ACQUITY UPLC BEH Glycan column (1.7 µm, 2.1 mm × 150 mm) at 40°C.
• Mobile Phase: Solvent A: 50 mM ammonium formate, pH 4.4; Solvent B: Acetonitrile.
• Gradient: Employ a linear gradient from 76% to 51% Solvent B over 53.5 minutes at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min.
• Detection: Use fluorescence detection (excitation 310 nm, emission 370 nm). Coupling to a mass spectrometer (HRMS) enables structural characterization [88].

High-Throughput Glycosylation Screening Using MALDI-TOF-MS

This protocol describes a recently developed high-throughput method for biologics development [53].

Internal Standard Preparation:

• Isotope Labeling: Prepare a full glycome internal standard library by subjecting a portion of the released N-glycans to a one-step reaction of reductive isotope labeling. This generates internal standards with identical composition but a +3 Da mass shift.
• Purification: Use Sepharose CL-4B HILIC SPE in a 96-well plate format for purification, replacing traditional cotton tips for enhanced compatibility and potential automation.
• Storage: Vacuum-dry the internal standards at room temperature and store at -80°C for large-scale analyses [53].

Sample Preparation and Analysis:

• Mixing: Combine the analytical sample containing native N-glycans with the corresponding internal standard library.
• Automation: The entire purification process can be automated using a liquid handling robotic workstation.
• Data Acquisition: Spot samples onto a MALDI target plate. Acquire mass spectra, which can process hundreds of samples within minutes.
• Quantification: For each target glycan, calculate the ratio of its signal intensity to that of its corresponding internal standard. This approach corrects for signal fluctuations and improves quantitative accuracy, as demonstrated by correctly reflecting a selective increase in G0F signal after spiking [53].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key reagents and materials essential for implementing the described glycan analysis workflows.

Table 3: Key Research Reagents and Their Functions in Glycan Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function	Application Notes
PNGase F	Enzyme that releases N-linked glycans from glycoproteins by cleaving the bond between asparagine and the core GlcNAc [89].	Essential for released glycan analysis. Requires protein denaturation for effective activity [89].
2-Aminobenzamide (2-AB)	Fluorescent label for glycans via reductive amination [3].	Enables highly sensitive fluorescence detection in HILIC-UPLC and CE-LIF. Standard for reference methods [3] [89].
APTS (8-aminopyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid)	Charged fluorescent label for glycans [3].	Primarily used in CE-LIF methods due to its negative charge, which facilitates electrophoretic separation [3].
Procainamide	Fluorescent label for glycans used in HILIC-HRMS workflows [88].	Offers sensitive fluorescence detection and is compatible with subsequent mass spectrometric analysis [88].
Sepharose CL-4B Beads	Solid-phase support for hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) purification [53].	Enables high-throughput, 96-well plate compatible cleanup of labeled glycans, facilitating automation [53].
HILIC Stationary Phase (e.g., BEH Glycan Column)	Polar chromatographic material for separating glycans based on hydrophilicity [88] [89].	The standard for UPLC-based glycan separation. Provides high-resolution isomer separation [88].

Selecting the right glycan analysis method requires a strategic balance of throughput, structural detail, and quantitative rigor. This framework guides researchers to align their analytical choices with project phase objectives: employing MALDI-TOF-MS for maximum speed in early screening, leveraging CE-LIF for efficient process development, utilizing HILIC-UPLC for reliable quality control, and relying on HILIC-HRMS for comprehensive characterization. By applying this structured decision-making process, scientists can ensure that their glycosylation analysis strategy effectively supports biologics development from clone to product.

Conclusion

HILIC-UPLC remains a cornerstone of glycan analysis, prized for its excellent precision, robustness, and high resolution for isomer separation, making it ideal for quality control and detailed profiling. However, no single method is universally superior. The choice of technique—be it HILIC-UPLC for its high peak capacity, CE-LIF for exceptional throughput, or various MS workflows for structural confirmation and site-specificity—must be driven by the specific application's requirements. The future of glycan analysis lies in the strategic integration of these orthogonal methods. Advances in automation, rapid labeling kits, and sophisticated 2D-LC-MS systems are pushing the boundaries towards faster, more sensitive, and information-rich analyses. This will be crucial for supporting the next generation of biopharmaceuticals and large-scale clinical glycomics studies, ultimately enabling a deeper understanding of glycosylation's role in biology and medicine.

References

• 1. Antibody Glycosylation and Its Impact on the ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022354915300939]
• 2. Principles of N-Linked Glycosylation Variations of IgG ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7345016/]
• 3. Comparison of methods for the analysis of therapeutic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4623496/]
• 4. Highly variable aggregation and glycosylation profiles and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40139530/]
• 5. Highly variable aggregation and glycosylation profiles and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022354925002291]
• 6. Comparison of hydrophilic-interaction, reversed-phase and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0021967310015323]
• 7. Glycan Analysis - HILIC Glycan Profiling [https://www.ludger.com/glycan-analysis-services/hilic-glycan-profiling.php]
• 8. Multidimensional high-performance liquid chromatography ... [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK593948/]
• 9. Novel glycan-related biomarker discovery by total glycomic ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-025-01377-3]
• 10. Comparison of 2-Aminobenzamide, Procainamide and ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/chemistry/articles/10.3389/fchem.2018.00324/full]
• 11. Glycan labeling strategies and their use in identification ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2911528/]
• 12. In a pursuit of optimal glycan fluorescent label for negative ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9574008/]
• 13. 2-AA Labeling Kit - Flourescent Glycan Analsysis [https://www.qa-bio.com/product/2-aa-labeling/]
• 14. High-throughput glycosylation screening method for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12491532/]
• 15. HILIC and Its Applications for Biotechnology, Part I [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/hilic-and-its-applications-biotechnology-part-i]
• 16. Development and application of GlycanDIA workflow for ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-61473-y]
• 17. Comparison of Four Rapid N-Glycan Analytical Methods ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/16/7320]
• 18. Development of a hydrophilic interaction liquid ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6822905/]
• 19. Applications of hydrophilic interaction and mixed-mode ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0021967324008987]
• 20. Advances in Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/advances-hydrophilic-interaction-liquid-chromatography-pharmaceutical-analysis]
• 21. High Resolution UPLC Analysis of 2-AB Labelled Glycans [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/high-resolution-uplc-analysis-2-ab-labelled-glycans]
• 22. Ultraperformance ion-pairing liquid chromatography with ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3108029/]
• 23. Highly sensitive two-dimensional profiling of N-linked ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003267024007918]
• 24. Recent progress in high-throughput and automated ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993623004843]
• 25. Quantitative N-Glycan Profiling of Therapeutic Monoclonal ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8617915/]
• 26. GlycanGUI: Automated Glycan Annotation and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8239159/]
• 27. N-Glycan Linkage Analysis by HILIC-UHPLC - Creative Proteomics [https://www.creative-proteomics.com/services/n-glycan-linkage-analysis-by-hilic-uhplc.htm]
• 28. N-Glycan Release & 2-AB Velocity Labelling Module [https://www.ludger.com/product-catalogue/n-glycan-analysis-workflow-module]
• 29. Released Glycan Analysis [https://www.elementlabsolutions.com/uk/chromatography-blog/post/released-glycan-analysis]
• 30. Glycan Analysis - HILIC-UPLC-FLR-ESI-MS/MS | Ludger Ltd [https://www.ludger.com/glycan-analysis-services/lc-msms-glycan-characterisation-level2.php]
• 31. Glucose unit computation in capillary zone electrophoresis ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993624002450]
• 32. GlycoProfileâ„¢ 2-AB Labeling Kit [https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/US/en/product/sigma/pp0520?srsltid=AfmBOooT3WynUXUUiLuCfZQEg17XgoiIXkj28Gusceb2ahCKy2CkPGwc]
• 33. Selecting Appropriate Glycoanalysis Methods in ... [https://www.americanpharmaceuticalreview.com/Featured-Articles/352327-Selecting-Appropriate-Glycoanalysis-Methods-in-Biopharmaceutical-Production/]
• 34. of separation techniques for the elucidation of IgG... Comparison [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24680513/]
• 35. Single-cell N-glycan analysis via laser-induced fluorescent ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925400525015722]
• 36. IMPROVED SAMPLE PREPARATION METHOD FOR ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2898890/]
• 37. Improved Fluorescent Labeling Efficiency of N-Linked, ... [https://www.bioprocessintl.com/monoclonal-antibodies/improved-fluorescent-labeling-efficiency-of-n-linked-high-mannose-oligosaccharides-using-8-aminopyrene-1-3-6-trisulfonic-acid-apts-for-analysis-of-glycoproteins]
• 38. APTS labeled glycan standards for N-glycan analysis by CE [https://www.agilent.com/en/product/biopharma-hplc-analysis/glycan-analysis/glycobiology-standards-libraries/apts-labeled-glycans?srsltid=AfmBOoqOOtyirkzL3EPv0GOq-oKbeJCsG1QInIcO1pigH1fSmW_GYRV0]
• 39. Development and validation of a platform reduced intact ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8291849/]
• 40. Migration of an HILIC Method for Released Glycan ... [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/library/application-notes/2021/migration-of-an-hilic-method-for-released-glycan-analysis-from-the-acquity-uplc-h-class-plus-bio-system-to-the-arc-premier-system.html?srsltid=AfmBOopNAjtPfyQBXGHJ-6wabzCMQDomJZRs5Go3BKi-dTZlJdCaESuI]
• 41. Method validation and new peak detection for the liquid ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0731708523003333]
• 42. Automated mass spectrometry multi-attribute method ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570023221000192]
• 43. Intact glycopeptide characterization using mass spectrometry [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4955807/]
• 44. Complementing reversed-phase selectivity with porous ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4719141/]
• 45. Advancement in Clinical Glycomics and Glycoproteomics for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12383589/]
• 46. Systematic Comparison of Reverse Phase and Hydrophilic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3689152/]
• 47. Reversed-phase separation methods for glycan analysis [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5203856/]
• 48. The Hyphenation of HILIC, Reversed-Phase HPLC, and ... [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/hyphenation-hilic-reversed-phase-hplc-and-atmospheric-pressure-ionization-ms]
• 49. Principles and applications of porous graphitic carbon ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021967324001018]
• 50. Comparison of Different HILIC Stationary Phases in the ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/25/20/4655]
• 51. Comparison of hydrophilic-interaction, reversed-phase and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21122866/]
• 52. a comparative study using HRMS, NMR, and HILIC-FLD [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11541336/]
• 53. High-throughput glycosylation screening method for ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s42004-025-01680-2]
• 54. The Best Automated Liquid Handling Systems: A Buyer's ... [https://www.labx.com/resources/the-best-automated-liquid-handling-systems-a-buyers-review-of-price-and-features/4816]
• 55. Automated Liquid Handling Products & Reviews [https://www.selectscience.net/products?techniques=automated-liquid-handling]
• 56. Comparison of methods for the analysis of therapeutic immunoglobulin G Fc-glycosylation profiles—Part 1: Separation-based methods - PMC [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4623496/]
• 57. Hydrophilic Interaction Chromatography for the ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/hydrophilic-interaction-chromatography-characterization-therapeutic-monoclonal-antibodies-protein-pe]
• 58. Determination of Sialic Acid Isomers from Released N- ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9535620/]
• 59. HILIC-UPLC Analysis of Brain Tissue N-Glycans - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27743369/]
• 60. Comparison of methods for the analysis of therapeutic immunoglobulin G Fc-glycosylation profiles—Part 2: Mass spectrometric methods - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4622708/]
• 61. Recent Advances in the Mass Spectrometry Methods for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6200424/]
• 62. Method Validation and Robustness [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/method-validation-and-robustness]
• 63. Analytical Method Validation: Back to Basics, Part II [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/analytical-method-validation-back-basics-part-ii]
• 64. A Practical Guide to Immunoassay Method Validation - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4541289/]
• 65. Robustness testing of the high throughput HPLC-based ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304416512000037]
• 66. Robustness and repeatability of GlycoWorks RapiFluor-MS ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34132802/]
• 67. Comparative Analysis and Validation of Different Steps in ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28137572/]
• 68. Comparative Analysis and Validation of Different Steps in ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0076687916303007]
• 69. Design of Experiments: Plackett Burman Designs [https://www.6sigma.us/six-sigma-in-focus/plackett-burman-designs/]
• 70. Burman Design - an overview [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/burman-design]
• 71. Hybridoma cell-culture and glycan profile dataset at ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5071535/]
• 72. Advantages and Disadvantages of HILIC-UHPLC in N- ... [https://www.mtoz-biolabs.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-hilic-uhplc-in-n-glycan-detection.html]
• 73. A comparison of hydrophilic interaction liquid ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021967323004648]
• 74. ANALYSIS OF GLYCANS DERIVED FROM ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3360420/]
• 75. Advancements in glycan analysis: high performance anion ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39721341/]
• 76. Analyzing Carbohydrates by HPAE-PAD Ion ... [https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home/industrial/chromatography/chromatography-learning-center/ion-chromatography-information/ion-chromatography-analysis-analyte/analyzing-carbohydrates-hpae-pad-ion-chromatography.html]
• 77. Adapting the Laser‐Induced Fluorescence Detection Setup ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11910966/]
• 78. Quantitative N-Glycan Profiling of Therapeutic Monoclonal ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4923/13/11/1744]
• 79. Characterization of Monoclonal Antibody Glycan ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/bioengineering-and-biotechnology/articles/10.3389/fbioe.2021.805788/full]
• 80. Comparison of Different HILIC Stationary Phases in the ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7594091/]
• 81. LC-MS/MS of Isomeric N-and O-Glycopeptides on ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11789930/]
• 82. Standardization of PGC-LC-MS-based glycomics for sample ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6923133/]
• 83. Enhancement of fucosylated N-glycan isomer separation ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021967320308840]
• 84. Comparative Performance of Four Methods for High ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4047478/]
• 85. Storage stability and HILIC-UHPLC-FLR analysis of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10101819/]
• 86. Characterization of Isomeric Glycan Structures by LC-MS/MS [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5581235/]
• 87. High-Throughput Glycomic Methods - PMC - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9614987/]
• 88. Plasma N-Glycan Profiling Enhances Diagnostic Precision in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12539935/]
• 89. Protocol for HILIC-UPLC Analysis of Brain Tissue N -Glycans [https://www.creative-proteomics.com/resource/protocol-for-hilic-uplc-analysis-of-brain-tissue-n-glycans.htm]