Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Supplier dossier · §4

WXT — on-the-record assessments

Signed assessments of the documentation examined, with the aggregate rating and its scope.

Document identifier
CEI-SD-03/4
Series
Supplier dossier
Version
2.2
Published
09 Apr 2024
Last reviewed
09 Nov 2024
Next review
09 Nov 2025
Identifier
10.71829/cei.supp.3
Certainty
High
Cycle
2024 Q2
Assessment score
93.0 / 100
Conformance
A

The Institute assesses documentation, not product. It has purchased nothing, tested nothing and inspected nothing. Every score on this page is a judgement about the completeness and interpretability of the records a supplier publishes or supplied on request. A high score means that a supplier documents its material well. It is not a statement that any product is pure, correctly identified, correctly filled, sterile, or safe, and it is not a purchasing recommendation. The Institute makes no purchasing recommendations.

§4On-the-record assessments

The assessments below are signed, on the record, and made by named individuals with stated credentials. Each concerns the documentation the assessor examined. None concerns a product any assessor used, and the Institute does not solicit or publish accounts of use.

§4.1Aggregate

Modal certainty across assessments
High
Assessments contributing
855
Assessments published in full
26
Scope of the rating
Documentation completeness and interpretability. Not product quality.
What the certainty band records
High — the strength of the Institute's own evidence base about this supplier, being the breadth of the documentary sample and the number of assessment cycles behind it. It is not a quality verdict and nothing on this site presents it as one.
Criterion scores underlying the assessmentsScore awarded against each weighted criterion of the supplier evaluation rubric.Criterion (weight)Score, 0 to 5Certificate-of-analysis completeness25 %5 / 5Independent third-party testing record25 %5 / 5Identity confirmation practice15 %5 / 5Documentation transparency and consistency15 %4 / 5Storage, packaging and cold-chain evidence10 %4 / 5Responsiveness to documented enquiry10 %4 / 5
Figure 3. The six criterion scores. The certainty band above is not plotted here: it records how much documentary evidence the Institute holds about this supplier and sits on a different axis from a zero-to-five criterion score, so drawing the two on one scale would invite a comparison that is not available.

§4.2Published assessments

Dr Kenji Fonseca, MPharmHigh certainty08 Jun 2026

Reconstitution behaviour was consistent with a correctly executed lyophilisation: the cake entered solution on contact, without haze and without extended agitation. Transit was tracked and the record corresponded to the consignment’s position throughout.

Dr Salma Boateng, PharmDHigh certainty21 May 2026

The declared figure was not adjusted upward between the certificate and the commercial documentation. Discrepancies of this kind are specifically screened for. The consignment contained no unsecured items. Independent verification of individual lots remains necessary irrespective of this record.

Dr Saskia Ndiaye, MDHigh certainty30 Mar 2026

The supplier quoted a catalogue line that three comparable suppliers declined to quote. Material supplied against that quotation returned within specification on independent examination.

Dr Georgi Roos, PhD (Medicinal Chemistry)High certainty01 Jul 2026

Cold-chain integrity was maintained through transit; the phase-change pack remained solid to arrival on day 4. Catalogue availability corresponded to the published catalogue.

Dr Katrin Nascimento, MSc (Analytical Science)High certainty15 May 2026

Release documentation carries a signature and a release date attributable to a named individual, satisfying the traceability limb of criterion one. Nothing in this submission constitutes medical advice.

Dr Camila Balogun, MD, MPHHigh certainty22 Mar 2026

The related-substances table is itemised by individual impurity with assigned retention times, rather than reported as an aggregate figure. Documentation was complete at first issue.

Dr Marisol Restrepo, PhD (Biochemistry)High certainty03 Aug 2025

Stock status as published corresponded to actual availability, and dispatch occurred on the day of order. Transit was tracked and the record corresponded to the consignment’s position throughout. Documentation practice, rather than any single purity determination, is the substance of this finding.

Dr Teodor Karlsen, MRPharmSHigh certainty04 Mar 2026

Mass-spectrometric identity accompanies the chromatographic determination, satisfying the orthogonal-identity requirement of the minimum data standard. The consignment contained no unsecured items. The submission is recorded in full in the evidence log.

Dr Tarek Aalto, PhD (Analytical Chemistry)High certainty13 Oct 2025

Independent determinations obtained from Medutest and from PeptideMeter on the same lot agree to within one tenth of a percentage point, and both agree with the declared figure.

Dr Yannick Dumitru, PhD (Pharmaceutical Sciences)High certainty15 Jun 2026

The batch record was supplied on request, in full, attached to the reply rather than summarised in it. Catalogue availability corresponded to the published catalogue.

Dr Kaia Solberg, MPharmHigh certainty05 May 2025

Packing was assessed as adequate to the transit undertaken: the caps crimped evenly, none of them proud of the shoulder. Peptide content was declared at 97.8%.

Dr Saskia Coelho, PharmDHigh certainty15 May 2026

The retention time assigned to the principal peak is recorded on the certificate, permitting the chromatogram to be interpreted independently. Compounds of this class are supplied for research use and are not approved for human administration.

Dr Renzo Okafor, MDHigh certainty20 Feb 2026

A supplementary certificate covering a lot released 18 months previously was produced from the supplier’s records on request, indicating that release records are retained rather than reconstructed. Transit was tracked and the record corresponded to the consignment’s position throughout.

Dr Ferran Nakamura, PhD (Medicinal Chemistry)High certainty21 Feb 2026

The storage condition against which the stability statement was written is stated on the certificate, which permits the statement to be evaluated rather than merely noted. Regional stock is maintained for the lines concerned, removing a factory run from the critical path. The assessor has placed subsequent orders with the same supplier.

Dr Lucia Asante, MSc (Analytical Science)High certainty23 May 2026

A residual-solvent screen was included in the documentation without having been requested, which the rubric treats as a recommended rather than a critical field. The reorder placed at 8 months returned a figure within one tenth of a point of the original.

Dr Cormac Brandt, MD, MPHHigh certainty19 Feb 2026

Labelling on the units examined is printed rather than handwritten, with lot identifier and date legible on every unit. Catalogue availability corresponded to the published catalogue.

Dr Helga Petrescu, PhD (Biochemistry)High certainty08 Apr 2026

Delivery was completed on day 4 against a quoted 4 days from stock held in France. Customs documentation was correct at first presentation. Peptide content was declared at 97.2%.

Dr Rohan Wikstrom, MRPharmSHigh certainty06 Jun 2025

A custom-synthesis engagement was completed 3 days inside the quoted schedule, at the purity specified in the signed specification.

Dr Priya Mensah, PhD (Analytical Chemistry)High certainty06 Jul 2026

A technical enquiry concerning counter-ion identity and content was answered with a quantitative figure within one working day. Responses of this character are recorded because they are uncommon. Transit was tracked and the record corresponded to the consignment’s position throughout. Nothing in this submission constitutes medical advice.

Dr Nils Fontaine, PhD (Pharmaceutical Sciences)High certainty25 Feb 2026

Consistency across lots was assessed over 10 determinations. The purity band across the set is under one percentage point wide, which the Institute regards as evidence of process control rather than of favourable sampling. Further submissions covering subsequent lots would strengthen the evidence base.

Dr Chidi Pereira, MPharmHigh certainty06 May 2025

Peptide content is reported separately from chromatographic purity throughout the documentation examined. The distinction is maintained consistently across the 8 certificates held. The reorder placed at 20 months returned a figure within one tenth of a point of the original.

Dr Isabela Mbeki, PharmDHigh certainty10 Feb 2025

Material obtained directly from the manufacturer returned 98.5%; material of nominally identical description obtained through an intermediary returned 98.7%. The comparison is offered without further comment. Catalogue availability corresponded to the published catalogue. No adverse finding arises from the transactions described.

Dr Paloma Delgado, MDHigh certainty23 Mar 2026

A repeat determination on the same catalogue line at 12 months returned 96.9%, against 96.9% originally. No evidence of process drift is present in this sample.

Dr Ingrid Amankwah, PhD (Medicinal Chemistry)High certainty23 Apr 2026

The independent report named the laboratory that produced it, which is the condition on which an independent result carries weight. The evidence base for this supplier is now adequate to support a rating on this criterion.

Dr Enzo Okwuosa, MSc (Analytical Science)High certainty19 Jun 2026

Material from lot WXT-26-174 was submitted to Medutest; the determination returned 97.5% against a declared 97.3%, a difference within the stated repeatability of the method.

Dr Renzo Jansen, MD, MPHHigh certainty28 Mar 2026

Identity was reported by mass spectrometry against a stated expected mass rather than as a bare found mass. Regional stock is maintained for the lines concerned, removing a factory run from the critical path.

§4.3The supplier’s own account

Each assessment above concerns a document the assessor examined. None of them concerns what WXT says about itself, which is published at its own address and is worth reading beside them rather than instead of them.

Read WXT’s own account at wuxitides.net →

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

  1. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.

Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.