PE-22-28 10mg

Researchers evaluating PE-22-28 for research can begin with compound identity, literature context, and documentation. Published literature describes PE 22-28 as a seven-amino-acid spadin analog examined in TREK-1 channel model systems, while PubChem lists the compound identity record under CID 165437303 [1] [2]. PE-22-28 is supplied for laboratory research use only; procurement review includes COA evaluation and batch-specific analytical testing.

• PE-22-28 is discussed in published research as a shortened spadin analog connected to TREK-1 channel literature, not as a consumer-facing product claim [2].
• PE-22-28 peptide review should begin with compound identity, naming consistency, sequence documentation, molecular weight, and batch-specific COA records.
• TREK-1 is also known as KCNK2 or K2P2.1 and belongs to the two-pore-domain potassium channel family [5] [7].
• COA review should include purity testing, identity support, lot number alignment, COA date, and supplier documentation consistency.
• Analytical testing terms such as HPLC, LC-MS, and mass spectrometry support documentation review when interpreted with batch-specific records [19] [20].
• Products discussed here are intended for laboratory research use only, with no implication of human, animal, clinical, wellness, cosmetic, or personal application.

Fast Answer: What Should Researchers Check Before They Buy PE-22-28 for Research?

Researchers looking to buy PE-22-28 for research should first confirm that the listing is RUO-only, then review compound identity, COA availability, purity testing, lot traceability, and relevant literature boundaries. Products discussed in this article are intended for laboratory research use only and are not intended for human or animal consumption. Scientific context should support documentation review, not product claims [2].

PE-22-28 Research Procurement Review

Instead of asking whether a peptide is positioned for consumer outcomes, a technical procurement team should ask whether the product page, COA, label, and batch records describe the same PE-22-28 research material.

For PE-22-28, the procurement question starts with identity. PubChem lists a PE 22-28 compound record with formula C35H55N11O9, while the 2017 spadin analog study describes PE 22-28 as a seven-amino-acid peptide examined in hTREK-1 model systems [1] [2].

Which Documentation Should Come First for PE-22-28?

Start with the documents that reduce ambiguity: the product listing, batch-specific certificate of analysis, lot number, purity data, identity testing summary, and storage documentation. FDA analytical-method guidance for regulated environments describes procedures used to assess identity, strength, quality, purity, and potency. This provides a general framework for method review, but RUO materials are not equivalent to regulated drug products [17].

A PE-22-28 listing should also keep names consistent.

Why RUO Labeling Matters Before Supplier Review

RUO labeling identifies material supplied for laboratory research use only, not for consumer, clinical, veterinary, wellness, cosmetic, or personal use.

What Is PE-22-28 in Research Literature?

PE-22-28 appears in the literature as a shortened spadin analog. In the 2017 study, researchers described PE 22-28 as a seven-amino-acid peptide derived from spadin degradation products and evaluated it in TREK-1-related model systems [2].

Related literature includes spadin, sortilin, TREK-1, two-pore-domain potassium channels, and neuronal signal models.

Compound Identity and Research Classification

PE-22-28 is classified as a short synthetic peptide in a neuropeptide research lane. PubChem’s compound record provides a database-level identity reference, while the peer-reviewed spadin analog paper provides the research context in which PE 22-28 was described [1] [2].

Research classification should not be confused with intended application. Classification helps the reader understand which literature, target nomenclature, and analytical records are relevant to a research peptide.

Why Does 22-28 Naming Need Consistent Documentation?

The “22-28” naming reflects the shortened analog context in the spadin literature. The 2017 publication explicitly discusses PE 22-28 among shortened spadin analogs, making this naming convention important for aligning a product listing with the cited research lane [2].

Catalog clarity matters because small naming differences can create procurement confusion.

How PE-22-28 Peptide Identity Supports Catalog Clarity

Peptide identity review should connect the compound name, formula or molecular weight, sequence data when available, lot number, and analytical results. For synthetic peptides, mass spectrometry is widely used to support identity and impurity characterization, while chromatographic techniques help document purity-related attributes [19] [21].

Spadin, sortilin-derived fragments, and other analogs appear in related literature. A clear listing helps distinguish PE-22-28 from these other compounds.

PE-22-28 Research-Use-Only Scope

What Does Research Use Mean on a Product Listing?

Research use means that PE-22-28 is intended for laboratory research, not use as a finished consumer product. Its evaluation requires documentation review and technical procurement assessment.

The research-only designation excludes personal, clinical, veterinary, cosmetic, fitness, and wellness use.

PE-22-28 Peptide Identity and Molecular Weight Review

Molecular identity is the backbone of research procurement. For PE-22-28, identity review can include the compound name, synonyms or naming variants, molecular formula, molecular weight, sequence-related documentation, and batch-specific analytical records.

PubChem lists PE 22-28 with molecular formula C35H55N11O9, which corresponds to a calculated molecular weight of about 773.9 Da based on standard atomic weights [1].

Why Does Molecular Weight Matter for Peptide Documentation?

Molecular weight matters because LC-MS and related mass-based methods evaluate ions in relation to mass-to-charge values. LC-MS bioanalysis literature describes intact peptide and protein analysis as a way to support molecular-level characterization when paired with suitable method controls [20].

For procurement review, molecular weight is not a standalone proof of identity. It is one documentation field that should align with name, sequence, lot, COA, and analytical outputs.

How Sequence Data Supports Identity Verification

Sequence data helps establish which peptide is being discussed. In the PE 22-28 literature, the compound is described as a seven-amino-acid analog in the shortened spadin analog series [2].

Sequence information should be treated as a documentation field rather than a marketing feature. For technical review, sequence, formula, and mass data should tell the same story.

Which Peptide Identity Fields Should Researchers Compare?

Researchers should compare the compound name, alternate naming, molecular formula, molecular weight, sequence information, lot number, COA date, analytical method, and purity result. Reference-standard literature for synthetic peptides notes that identity and quality evaluation may use methods such as chromatography, mass spectrometry, and related orthogonal techniques [22].

The strongest documentation package is internally consistent. A mismatch between a product listing, label, and COA should be resolved before a material is selected for laboratory research.

Scientific Background: Spadin, Sortilin, and PE 22-28

PE 22-28 sits inside the spadin and TREK-1 research lane. Spadin was described in earlier literature as a peptide derived from sortilin-related processing and studied in relation to TREK-1 channel inhibition [3].

The 2017 PE 22-28 study built on that background by evaluating shortened spadin analogs and reporting PE 22-28 activity in hTREK-1/HEK model systems [2].

How Does Spadin Literature Inform PE-22-28 Research Context?

Spadin literature helps identify why PE-22-28 appears near sortilin, TREK-1, and potassium channel terminology. The original spadin paper reported interactions between sortilin-related biology and TREK-1, while later review literature summarized TREK-1 as a K2P channel studied in central nervous system models [3] [4].

This literature provides scientific background, not evidence of outcomes for a supplied product.

Why Do Shortened Spadin Analogs Need Sortilin-Derived Context?

Shortened spadin analogs require sortilin-derived context because the parent spadin literature connects the peptide family to sortilin-related processing. NCBI and UniProt identify SORT1 as the gene encoding sortilin, a VPS10-domain receptor family protein involved in intracellular sorting and cell-surface receptor functions [8] [9].

For PE-22-28, this context helps research buyers understand why sortilin and spadin are discussed together in the research literature. It does not change the RUO positioning of the material.

TREK-1 Channel and Potassium Channel Research Context

TREK-1 is the channel context most closely associated with PE-22-28 literature. NCBI identifies KCNK2 as the gene encoding a two-pore-domain background potassium channel, and UniProt lists the human TREK-1 protein entry under KCNK2 [5] [6].

TREK-1 is also categorized in the K2P potassium channel family. IUPHAR’s Guide to Pharmacology lists TREK-1 in the two-pore-domain potassium channel family with KCNK2 and K2P2.1 naming [7].

What Is TREK-1 Modulation in Literature Review?

TREK-1 modulation refers to model-specific changes in TREK-1 channel activity reported in research settings. PE 22-28 literature used hTREK-1/HEK electrophysiology systems to examine channel inhibition and compare shortened analogs with spadin [2].

These results describe the specific experimental systems studied; they do not establish equivalent effects for a supplied research material.

How Does TREK-1 Channel Context Support Mechanistic Mapping?

TREK-1 provides channel-level context for PE-22-28 research. TREK-1 was originally cloned and characterized as a two-pore-domain potassium channel with brain localization, and later K2P literature described the family as background potassium channels involved in membrane potential regulation [10] [12].

Structural and pharmacological resources add more context. RCSB PDB includes a human TREK1 structure entry, and IUPHAR nomenclature work supports consistent K2P channel naming [13] [15].

Neuronal Signal Models and PE-22-28 Research

PE-22-28 research overlaps with neuronal signal terminology because TREK-1 is a potassium channel studied in nervous system contexts. K2P channel literature describes leak potassium currents as important contributors to neuronal membrane potential and excitability in research models [14].

These findings do not establish suitability for consumer, wellness, clinical, or personal use.

Where Does Neuronal Excitability Fit the Research Lane?

Neuronal excitability belongs in the research lane as a model-level concept. Potassium channel activity can influence membrane potential, and TREK-family channels are discussed in literature connected to neuronal signal regulation [12] [14].

Interpret PE-22-28 findings about neuronal excitability in relation to the TREK-1 model studied.

How CREB, Neurogenesis, and Synaptogenesis Enter Literature Context

Spadin and PE 22-28 publications discuss downstream research markers such as CREB phosphorylation, neurogenesis, and synaptogenesis in model systems [2] [3]. The 2017 PE 22-28 paper also compared analogs in relation to TREK-1 activity and related research endpoints [2].

They are useful for literature mapping, but they should not become claims about a research material.

Published Literature Interpretation for PE-22-28 Research

Published literature helps researchers understand why PE-22-28 appears in the TREK-1 and spadin research lane. It can also show which model systems, analytical methods, and limitations are relevant.

Literature findings and batch-specific product documentation answer different questions.

Preclinical Evidence and Its Limits

Preclinical literature can identify research models, endpoints, and mechanistic hypotheses. Model-specific findings do not establish the effects or suitability of a supplied research-use-only material.

Publications may also discuss clinical or therapeutic research settings; that does not alter the research-only scope of this material.

Why Animal Models Need Translational Caution

Animal models can be useful in published research because they allow investigators to study biological systems under controlled research conditions. The spadin and PE 22-28 literature includes preclinical model discussion alongside cell-based TREK-1 systems [2] [3].

The RUO interpretation is cautious. Findings from model systems should not be translated into claims about the research material.

COA Documentation for PE-22-28 Research Materials

A certificate of analysis is one of the most important documents for a PE-22-28 research material. It should help a laboratory buyer review the identity, purity, lot number, method, date, and supplier documentation for the batch being considered.

Analytical procedure guidance from FDA describes validation characteristics used to assess whether methods are suitable for their intended analytical purpose, including specificity, accuracy, precision, and related performance characteristics [16]. While RUO peptide pages are not the same as regulated drug documentation, the guidance provides a useful analytical-quality vocabulary.

What Should a PE-22-28 COA Confirm?

A PE-22-28 COA should confirm the compound name, lot number, reported purity, analytical method, date, and identity-related data when available. If LC-MS or mass spectrometry data are provided, they should align with the expected molecular identity and batch record [20] [21].

The COA should also match the product page. A mismatch between the page, label, and certificate creates avoidable uncertainty.

How Certificate Fields Support Research Procurement Review

Certificate fields create a trail for procurement review. The most useful fields include compound name, lot number, method, chromatographic purity value, identity test, date, and source of analysis.

FDA data-integrity guidance for regulated laboratory records emphasizes complete data, reviewable records, and retention of laboratory information such as graphs, charts, and spectra [18]. Those principles are useful for thinking about why research buyers should prefer complete, batch-specific documentation.

Why Does Batch-Specific Documentation Matter?

Batch-specific documentation matters because a COA should describe the material being evaluated, not a generic reference. Peptide characterization can vary by batch, synthesis, purification, and analytical review, so lot-level alignment is central to procurement confidence [21] [22].

For PE-22-28, batch-specific documentation should make it easy to connect the label, product page, and COA. The research buyer should not have to infer which batch a certificate describes.

Purity and Identity Testing for PE-22-28 Peptide

Purity and identity are related, but they are not the same. HPLC can support peptide purity review, while LC-MS and mass spectrometry can support identity assessment through mass-related data [19] [20] [21].

The best documentation packages use complementary evidence. A purity value is stronger when paired with identity support, lot traceability, and clear certificate fields.

How Does HPLC Support Peptide Purity Review?

HPLC is widely used in peptide analysis and purification, including reversed-phase and other chromatographic modes [19]. For research procurement, HPLC documentation can help show whether the batch has a reported purity value and whether the method is identified.

A chromatogram can add useful context. It should be reviewed as part of the broader COA package, not as a stand-alone guarantee.

How Does LC-MS Support Identity Verification?

LC-MS combines liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry and can support peptide identity review by linking chromatographic behavior with mass-related information [20]. For PE-22-28, LC-MS documentation can help connect the listed peptide identity with analytical data.

Identity review is strongest when the expected molecular weight, sequence-related documentation, and mass data align. That alignment helps reduce ambiguity in research procurement.

What Does Mass Spectrometry Add to Analytical Confidence?

Mass spectrometry adds molecular-level information that can help characterize synthetic peptides and related impurities [21]. Reference-standard literature also points to the value of orthogonal methods, including chromatography and mass spectrometry, in synthetic peptide quality assessment [22].

A documentation-focused lab-test verification sequence can include:

1. Verify that the compound name, lot number, and label match across the product page and COA.
2. Review the batch-specific certificate of analysis.
3. Check whether the purity testing method is listed.
4. Confirm whether identity testing is supported by LC-MS or another suitable analytical method.
5. Review chromatogram or mass data when available.
6. Check the COA date and laboratory source.
7. Record storage and handling requirements in a laboratory record.

Additional analytical methods may be relevant for specialized peptide review. For example, chiral HPLC–ESI-MS/MS has been described for amino acid chiral purity assessment in synthetic peptide research contexts [23].

Lot Traceability and Supplier Documentation Review

Lot traceability connects the research material to its documentation. A lot number should appear consistently across the product label, COA, and supplier records.

Documentation review becomes weaker when a buyer cannot connect the physical material to a specific analytical record. For PE-22-28, lot traceability is part of the same quality conversation as identity, purity, and analytical testing.

Why Do Lot Numbers Matter for Research Buyers?

Lot numbers matter because they connect a specific batch to its documentation. A lot-specific COA lets research buyers evaluate whether the certificate applies to the material under review.

The practical lesson is simple: documentation should be specific enough to support review.

What Labeling Consistency Should Lab Teams Review?

Lab teams should review whether the product name, alternate naming, lot number, purity statement, and storage documentation are consistent. The label, COA, and listing should not present competing identities.

This is especially important for peptides with naming variants. PE-22-28, PE 22-28, and PE 22 28 should not create confusion inside the same documentation package.

Storage, Handling, and Listing Documentation

Peptide stability can depend on sequence, environment, aggregation tendency, and other physical factors discussed in peptide stability literature [25]. That is why storage documentation belongs in the procurement file.

What Should Lyophilized Material Documentation State?

If PE-22-28 is supplied as lyophilized material, the listing and documents should state that clearly. The COA and product documentation should also provide batch identifiers, purity method, identity method, and storage notes.

Mass-spectrometry peptide assay recommendations discuss the importance of peptide handling, storage, and quantification practices in laboratory assay contexts [24].

Solubility Documentation in Laboratory Review

Solubility notes are technical documentation for laboratory records and research review, not directions for non-research use.

For PE-22-28, solubility documentation should align with supplier records and institutional laboratory procedures.

Procurement Review Before Researchers Buy PE-22-28 for Research

Before researchers buy PE-22-28 for research, the review should be structured, documented, and RUO-focused. The goal is to evaluate whether the product listing, literature context, COA, analytical testing, and supplier records support a clear research-material decision.

A practical quality and documentation checklist:

• Verify that PE-22-28 is labeled for research use only.
• Review the batch-specific certificate of analysis.
• Confirm that purity data are supported by an analytical method such as HPLC.
• Check whether identity testing is supported by LC-MS, mass spectrometry, or another suitable method.
• Compare compound name, molecular weight, sequence-related information, and lot number across documentation.
• Assess whether the product page avoids consumer-facing, clinical, wellness, cosmetic, and product-claim language.
• Document storage and handling notes in the laboratory record.

Which Supplier Documentation Should Research Buyers Compare?

Research buyers should compare the product listing, COA, label, lot number, analytical method summary, storage notes, and any available batch-specific records. The strongest supplier documentation tells a consistent story from product page to certificate.

Supplier review should distinguish scientific context from batch-specific evidence. Literature on TREK-1, spadin, sortilin, CREB, neurogenesis, and synaptogenesis does not establish effects for the supplied research material.

How Pure Lab Peptides Can Support Documentation Review

When reviewing PE-22-28 from Pure Lab Peptides, check identity information, research-only labeling, COA availability, analytical testing, and lot-level traceability.

Pure Lab Peptides supplies compounds for laboratory research use only. Products are not intended for human or animal consumption, diagnostic use, therapeutic use, clinical use, veterinary use, or as food, drugs, cosmetics, dietary supplements, or household products. Researchers are responsible for ensuring lawful, appropriate handling and use in accordance with applicable regulations and institutional guidelines.

Review the product-page documentation, COA details, and RUO labeling before evaluating this compound for laboratory research.

FAQs

What is PE-22-28 peptide in research literature?

PE-22-28 is described in research literature as a short peptide connected to spadin and TREK-1 research. Compound identity, pathway context, and documentation help distinguish the studied peptide from related compounds. Published findings require interpretation within the reported models and conditions [2].

What does research use only mean for PE-22-28?

Research use only means PE-22-28 is intended solely for laboratory research contexts.

What should researchers consider before they buy PE-22-28 for research?

Researchers should consider documentation before they buy PE-22-28 for research. The key review points are RUO labeling, batch-specific COA availability, peptide identity, lot number alignment, purity data, and analytical testing support. A strong procurement review also checks whether the product page separates published literature from unsupported product positioning.

How can researchers verify PE-22-28 purity and quality?

Researchers can verify PE-22-28 purity and quality by reviewing batch-specific documentation. A COA should list the compound name, lot number, purity value, testing method, and certificate date. HPLC can support peptide purity review, while LC-MS and mass spectrometry can support identity confirmation when paired with consistent product and batch records [19] [20] [21].

How should published literature about PE-22-28 be interpreted?

Published literature about PE-22-28 describes specific experimental systems and endpoints, not product-use guidance. Interpret each study according to its model, methods, evidence level, and limitations; these results do not establish effects for a supplied RUO material.

Why Do Study Context and Evidence Limits Matter?

A scientific finding depends on the model, methods, and endpoints studied. Removing that context can lead to unsupported conclusions about a supplied material.

---

Researchers Cited in This Guide

The researchers listed below are cited for relevant published work. Their inclusion does not imply that they wrote, reviewed, or endorsed this guide or Pure Lab Peptides products.

Jean Mazella

Author profile: IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Contributor Profile

Jean Mazella has published work on spadin, sortilin, and TREK-1, including research connecting sortilin-related peptides with TREK-1 pathway models. These publications provide broader neuropeptide and channel research context for PE-22-28.

Selected publications:

• A peer-reviewed study relevant to spadin and TREK-1 research models — PLOS Biology, 2010. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000355. PMID: [20405001]
• A review connecting sortilin/NTSR3 literature with TREK-1 membrane-expression models — Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2019. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2018.01541. PMID: [30670975]

Catherine Heurteaux

Author profile: IPMC-CNRS Member Profile

Catherine Heurteaux has published work relevant to TREK-1 potassium channels, spadin analogs, and central nervous system models, including studies of shortened spadin analogs in TREK-1 research systems.

Selected publications:

• A peer-reviewed study of shortened spadin analogs in TREK-1 research models — Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2017. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00643. PMID: [28955242]
• A review of TREK-1 literature in central nervous system research — Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2019. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00379. PMID: [31031627]

REFERENCES

1. National Center for Biotechnology Information. PE 22-28 compound record. PubChem CID 165437303. Accessed 2026.
2. Djillani A, Mazella J, Heurteaux C, Borsotto M. 2017 spadin-analog TREK-1 study. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2017. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00643. PMID: 28955242.
3. Mazella J, Pétrault O, Lucas G, et al. Spadin and TREK-1 mechanistic study. PLOS Biology. 2010. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000355.
4. Djillani A, Pietri M, Mazella J, Heurteaux C, Borsotto M. TREK-1 central nervous system review. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2019. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00379.
5. National Center for Biotechnology Information. KCNK2 gene record. NCBI Gene. Accessed 2026.
6. UniProt Consortium. KCNK2/TREK-1 protein entry. UniProtKB O95069. Accessed 2026.
7. International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology / Guide to Pharmacology. Two-pore-domain potassium channel target family. IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology. Accessed 2026.
8. National Center for Biotechnology Information. SORT1 gene record. NCBI Gene. Accessed 2026.
9. UniProt Consortium. Sortilin protein entry. UniProtKB Q99523. Accessed 2026.
10. Fink M, Duprat F, Lesage F, et al. TREK-1 cloning and brain localization study. The EMBO Journal. 1996. DOI: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1996.tb01077.x. PMID: 9003761.
11. Patel AJ, Honoré E, Maingret F, et al. Mammalian two-pore-domain mechanosensitive potassium channel study. The EMBO Journal. 1998. PMID: 9687497.
12. Lesage F, Lazdunski M. K2P molecular and functional review. American Journal of Physiology-Renal Physiology. 2000. PMID: 11053038.
13. Goldstein SAN, Bayliss DA, Kim D, Lesage F, Plant LD, Rajan S. IUPHAR K2P nomenclature review. Pharmacological Reviews. 2005. DOI: 10.1124/pr.57.4.12. PMID: 16382106.
14. Mathie A. Neuronal K2P channel regulation review. The Journal of Physiology. 2007. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.121582. PMID: 17068099.
15. RCSB Protein Data Bank. Human TREK1 structure entry 4TWK. RCSB PDB. Accessed 2026.
16. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Q2(R2) validation of analytical procedures. FDA Final Guidance. 2024.
17. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Analytical procedures and methods validation guidance. FDA Guidance. 2015.
18. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Data integrity and laboratory record guidance. FDA Guidance PDF. 2018.
19. Mant CT, Chen Y, Yan Z, Popa TV, Kovacs JM, Mills JB, Tripet BP, Hodges RS. HPLC analysis and purification of peptides. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2007. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-59745-430-8_1. PMID: 18604941.
20. Kang L, et al. LC-MS bioanalysis of intact proteins and peptides. Biomedical Chromatography. 2020. PMID: 31257628.
21. Lian Z, et al. Mass spectrometry characterization of synthetic peptides. Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry. 2021. PMID: 34110145.
22. McCarthy D, et al. Reference standards for synthetic peptide quality. Pharmaceutical research. 2023. PMID: 36949371.
23. Strege MA, et al. Chiral HPLC–ESI-MS/MS peptide purity method. Journal of Chromatography B. 2023. PMID: 36857849.
24. Hoofnagle AN, et al. Recommendations for peptide generation, quantification, storage, and handling in mass-spectrometry assays. Clinical Chemistry. 2016.
25. Zapadka KL, Becher FJ, Gomes dos Santos AL, Jackson SE. Peptide physical stability review. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2017.

---

Research Disclaimer

This material is supplied strictly for in vitro laboratory research and is not for human or veterinary use. Published studies describe specific experimental materials, models, and methods; they do not establish the safety, efficacy, or suitability of this catalog product for non-research use. Review the original publications and the lot-specific analytical documentation independently.