(2015) Comparison of methods for the analysis of therapeutic immunoglobulin G Fc-glycosylation profiles-Part 1: Separation-based methods, mAbs, 7:1, 167-179, DOI: 10.4161/19420862.2014.986000 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10. 4161/19420862.2014 Abbreviations: mAb, monoclonal antibody; Fc, fragment crystallizable; IgG, immunoglobulin G; HILIC-UPLC, hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography-ultra high performance liquid chromatography; 2-AB, 2-aminobenzamide; Fab, fragment, antigen-binding; CE-LIF, capillary electrophoresis-laser induced fluorescence; HPLC, high performance liquid chromatography; MALDI-MS, matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-mass spectrometry; ESI-MS, electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry; HPAEC-PAD, high-performance anion exchange chromatography with pulsed amperometric detection; APTS, 8-aminopyrene-1, 3, 6-trisulfonic acid; DSA-FACE, DNA-sequencer-aided fluorophore-assisted carbohydrate electrophoresis; ANTS, 8-aminonaphthalene-1, 3, 6-trisulfonate; CCGE, cartridge-based capillary gel electrophoresis; HR, high resolution; IAB, InstantAB labeling; CHO, Chinese hamster ovaryImmunoglobulin G (IgG) crystallizable fragment (Fc) glycosylation is crucial for antibody effector functions, such as antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, and for their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics behavior. To monitor the Fc-glycosylation in bioprocess development, as well as product characterization and release analytics, reliable techniques for glycosylation analysis are needed. A wide range of analytical methods has found its way into these applications. In this study, a comprehensive comparison was performed of separation-based methods for Fcglycosylation profiling of an IgG biopharmaceutical. A therapeutic antibody reference material was analyzed 6-fold on 2 different days, and the methods were compared for precision, accuracy, throughput and other features; special emphasis was placed on the detection of sialic acid-containing glycans. Seven, non-mass spectrometric methods were compared; the methods utilized liquid chromatography-based separation of fluorescent-labeled glycans, capillary electrophoresis-based separation of fluorescent-labeled glycans, or high-performance anion exchange chromatography with pulsed amperometric detection. Hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography-ultra high performance liquid chromatography of 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB)-labeled glycans was used as a reference method. All of the methods showed excellent precision and accuracy; some differences were observed, particularly with regard to the detection and quantitation of minor glycan species, such as sialylated glycans.