HomeIndustry & MarketThe Complete Guide to...

The Complete Guide to Peptide Therapeutics: From Discovery to Market (2026)

Peptide Proof — Evidence-Based Peptide Intelligence. Independent analysis. No paywall.

Peptide therapeutics have entered a golden age. In 2025, the global peptide drug market surpassed fifty-eight billion dollars, driven by the extraordinary commercial performance of GLP-1 receptor agonists and a deepening pipeline spanning oncology, metabolic disease, rare disorders, and beyond. This guide provides a comprehensive, end-to-end overview of peptide drug development — from discovery technologies to manufacturing economics to regulatory pathways — for researchers, investors, and industry professionals.

1. Peptide Discovery: Libraries, AI, and Screening Technologies

Peptide drug discovery has undergone a radical transformation in the past five years. The traditional approach — screening large libraries against a target of interest — remains the workhorse, but the libraries, the screening methods, and the computational tools that guide them have evolved beyond recognition.

Library Technologies: From Millions to Trillions

The foundational discovery technology is the peptide library: a vast collection of peptide variants, each linked to its encoding genetic material. The evolution has been dramatic. Phage display libraries, the workhorse of the 1990s and 2000s, typically contain 10⁸ to 10¹⁰ unique sequences. mRNA display platforms — commercialized by companies including PeptiDream — via the RaPID system — — push this to 10¹² to 10¹⁴, a four-order-of-magnitude increase. DNA-encoded libraries (DELs) bridge the gap between biological and synthetic approaches, enabling the incorporation of non-canonical amino acids and chemical modifications that are inaccessible to ribosomal translation.

The key metric is not raw library size but functional diversity: the number of library members that are well-folded, soluble, and available for target binding under physiologically relevant selection conditions. A well-designed 10⁹-member library will consistently outperform a poorly designed 10¹³-member library. Selection stringency — matching the buffer conditions, pH, temperature, and redox environment to the target’s physiological context — is the single most underappreciated factor in library-based discovery.

Related: Peptide Library Technologies: From Phage Display to Trillion-Member mRNA Libraries

AI-Driven Design

In 2026, artificial intelligence has moved from a supporting role to a leading role in peptide discovery. Diffusion models — adapted from the image-generation architectures that power DALL-E and Midjourney — can now generate peptide backbones conditioned on a target protein surface. The University of Washington’s Institute for Protein Design reported a thirty-four percent experimental hit rate for computationally designed macrocycles targeting K-Ras, also known as G12D, a tenfold improvement over random library screening.

The most productive workflow is AI proposes, human disposes: computational models generate ranked lists of candidate sequences, and experienced peptide chemists select candidates based on synthesizability, developability, and IP considerations. AI expands the search space; human judgment narrows it to the viable.

Related: AI-Designed Peptides: Machine Learning Enters the Therapeutic Pipeline | Cyclic Peptides Are Unlocking the Undruggable Proteome

2. Peptide Chemistry: Synthesis, Modification, and Manufacturing

Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis, also known as SPPS

SPPS, invented by Bruce Merrifield in 1963 — Nobel Prize, 1984 —, remains the dominant manufacturing method for therapeutic peptides. The process builds peptides stepwise on an insoluble resin support, with each cycle consisting of deprotection, washing, coupling, and washing. The efficiency of each coupling step — typically 98.0–99.5 percent — determines the final purity of the crude product. After 30 coupling cycles at ninety-nine percent efficiency, approximately seventy-four percent of the product is the desired full-length peptide; the remaining twenty-six percent consists of deletion. truncation impurities that must be removed by preparative HPLC.

Three manufacturing innovations are reshaping the economics of peptide production: flow chemistry, which reduces synthesis time by 3–4× and solvent consumption by sixty percent; simulated moving bed (SMB) chromatography, which cuts purification solvent use by 40–fifty percent; and enzymatic ligation, which enables the assembly of long peptides from shorter, higher-purity fragments.

Related: Flow Chemistry Meets SPPS: Continuous Peptide Manufacturing Comes of Age | The Economics of Peptide API Manufacturing: A Cost Breakdown

Chemical Modifications

Therapeutic peptides are rarely used in their native form. Common modifications include lipidation (conjugation of fatty acid chains to extend half-life via albumin binding), PEGylation (polyethylene glycol conjugation to reduce renal clearance), N-methylation (to improve proteolytic stability and membrane permeability), and cyclization (to constrain conformation and improve target affinity). Each modification adds synthetic complexity and cost — a lipidated 31-residue peptide like semaglutide requires 4–6 additional synthetic steps compared to the unmodified sequence.

3. Therapeutic Classes: GLP-1s, Macrocycles, PDCs, and Vaccines

GLP-1 Receptor Agonists

The GLP-1 class — semaglutide (Ozempic/Wegovy), tirzepatide (Mounjaro/Zepbound), and a pipeline of next-generation multi-receptor agonists — dominates the peptide therapeutics landscape. These drugs generated 38.7 billion dollars in 2025 revenue, accounting for two-thirds of the entire peptide market. The class works by mimicking the endogenous incretin hormone GLP-1, which enhances glucose-dependent insulin secretion, suppresses glucagon, slows gastric emptying, and promotes satiety.

The commercial success of GLP-1s has created a manufacturing capacity crisis. Global SPPS capacity is approximately 8.2 metric tons per year, and Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly consume nearly forty percent of that for in-house production. CDMOs are investing over three billion dollars in capacity expansion through 2028, but new production lines take 3–4 years from ground-breaking to FDA qualification.

Related: GLP-1/GLP-2 Co-agonists: Multi-Receptor Strategies Reshape Metabolic Drug Development | Inside the Semaglutide Supply Chain

Cyclic Peptides and Macrocycles

Cyclic peptides — constrained by head-to-tail or side-chain-to-side-chain cyclization — address a fundamental limitation of linear peptides: conformational flexibility. By pre-organizing into a binding-competent conformation, macrocycles achieve higher affinity for flat, extended protein surfaces that small molecules cannot engage. The FDA’s 2025 draft guidance on peptide drug development explicitly acknowledges macrocycles as a distinct regulatory category.

As of mid-2026, 47 macrocyclic peptides are in active clinical development, targeting proteins long considered undruggable — K-Ras, c-Myc, beta-catenin, and others.

Related: Cyclic Peptides Are Unlocking the Undruggable Proteome

Peptide-Drug Conjugates (PDCs)

PDCs combine a tumor-homing peptide ligand with a cytotoxic payload via a cleavable linker. At 2–5 kDa, PDCs are 30–75× smaller than antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), enabling superior tumor penetration and simpler manufacturing. The field leader, Bicycle Therapeutics’ BT8009 — targeting Nectin-4 —, reported a thirty-eight percent objective response rate in patients who had progressed on ADC therapy. With 23 PDC programs in clinical development, the modality is establishing itself as a distinct pillar of targeted oncology.

Related: Peptide-Drug Conjugates: The Next Generation of Targeted Cancer Therapy

Neoantigen Vaccines

Personalized cancer vaccines built from tumor-specific mutant peptides have entered Phase II with promising efficacy signals. Evaxion Biotech’s EVX-01 reported a sixty-seven percent objective response rate in combination with pembrolizumab in metastatic melanoma. While mRNA-based vaccines — Moderna/Merck’s mRNA-4157 — have captured headlines, peptide vaccines offer distinct advantages: ambient-temperature stability, simpler manufacturing, and a century of regulatory precedent for peptide-based products.

Related: Neoantigen Peptide Vaccines: Personalized Cancer Immunotherapy Comes of Age

4. Delivery Challenges: Oral, Injectable, and CNS

Oral Peptide Delivery

The ability to administer peptide drugs orally rather than by injection represents the single largest commercial opportunity in the field. The injectable GLP-1 market exceeds forty billion dollars, and an oral option could double the addressable patient population. But, peptides face four sequential barriers: enzymatic degradation by proteases, poor permeability across the intestinal epithelium, mucus entrapment, and first-pass hepatic clearance. Most unmodified peptides exhibit oral bioavailability below one percent.

The clinical success of oral semaglutide — Rybelsus, 4.2 billion dollars in 2025 revenue — — which uses the SNAC permeation enhancer to achieve 0.8–1.2 percent bioavailability — has validated the commercial viability of oral peptide delivery. Multiple enabling technologies are in clinical development: lipid nanocapsules, ionic liquids, hydrogel microcarriers, and cell-penetrating peptide conjugates.

Related: Oral Peptide Delivery: Breaking the Bioavailability Barrier

Crossing the Blood-Brain Barrier

For neurodegenerative indications, the blood-brain barrier (BBB) is the central unsolved challenge. Peptides must cross by active transport: receptor-mediated transcytosis (RMT), adsorptive-mediated transcytosis, or carrier-mediated transport. Focused ultrasound with microbubbles offers a physical approach — transiently opening the BBB in targeted brain regions —. the technique is limited to academic medical centers and impractical for chronic indications requiring years of treatment. No peptide therapeutic for a primary neurodegenerative indication has reached Phase III with positive data as of mid-2026.

Related: Peptide Therapeutics in Neurodegenerative Disease: Crossing the Blood-Brain Barrier

5. Clinical Development and Regulatory Pathways

Between January 2020 and June 2026, the FDA approved 28 peptide-based drugs and the EMA approved 22. Oncology approvals benefit from the fastest review times (median 6.1 months) due to accelerated approval pathways; rare disease approvals show the widest variance (6–18+ months).

The FDA’s October 2025 draft guidance on peptide drug development — the agency’s first dedicated peptide guidance since 1994 — established three significant precedents: macrocycles are recognized as a distinct regulatory category, peptide impurity identification thresholds are set at 0.5 percent (vs. 0.1–0.2 percent for small molecules), and in silico T-cell epitope screening is recommended for all peptides intended for chronic administration.

Manufacturing deficiencies are the single largest source of regulatory failure for peptide drugs, accounting for forty-one percent of Complete Response Letters between 2020 and 2026. The lesson is clear: invest in CMC development early.

Related: FDA and EMA Peptide Drug Approvals: A 2020–2026 Regulatory Analysis

6. Manufacturing Economics and the CDMO Landscape

The cost of peptide API manufacturing ranges from $300 to over $50,000 per gram, depending on peptide length, scale, and complexity. The single largest cost driver is HPLC purification — 30–fifty percent of total cost —, not raw materials. Protected amino acids and coupling reagents account for 25–thirty percent of cost; solvents (DMF, acetonitrile) for 15–twenty percent.

The peptide CDMO market reached 4.2 billion dollars in 2026, dominated by three players: Bachem — twenty-five percent share —, PolyPeptide Group — thirteen percent —, and CordenPharma — eleven percent —. GLP-1 demand has effectively sold out production-scale reactors through 2028. Companies developing peptide drugs face a critical build-vs-buy decision, with the economic crossover point typically falling between 50–100 kg/year.

Related: The Economics of Peptide API Manufacturing: A Cost Breakdown | The Peptide CDMO Landscape

7. Market Dynamics: The GLP-1 Era and Beyond

The Patent Cliff

Between 2027 and 2030, patents on 14 peptide drugs representing thirty-two billion dollars in combined 2025 revenue will expire. The heaviest concentration falls in the GLP-1 space: semaglutide’s primary composition-of-matter patent expires in 2027, tirzepatide’s in 2029. But, manufacturing process patents extend to 2032–2034, and the capital requirements for GLP-1 biosimilar manufacturing — five hundred million dollars+ per production line — will limit the field to 3–4 competitors.

Related: The Peptide Patent Cliff: What 2027–2030 Means for the Industry

Non-Therapeutic Peptide Markets

Beyond pharmaceuticals, peptides are expanding into cosmetics (3.2 billion dollars market), biomaterials (seven hundred eighty million dollars), and food/agriculture applications. Antimicrobial peptides are replacing traditional chemical preservatives; self-assembling peptide hydrogels are entering clinical use in wound healing. tissue engineering; and cosmetic peptides — signal peptides, neurotransmitter inhibitors, and copper peptides — have become a mainstay of premium skincare.

Related: Cosmetic Peptides: The Science Behind the Skincare Revolution | Peptide Biomaterials | Antimicrobial Peptides in Food & Agriculture

8. The Future: 2027–2030 Outlook

Five trends will define the peptide therapeutics landscape through 2030:

1. Manufacturing will be the binding constraint. GLP-1 demand will continue to outstrip supply through at least 2028. Companies that secure manufacturing capacity — whether through CDMO partnerships or in-house investment — will capture disproportionate value.

2. Multi-receptor agonists will raise the efficacy bar. GLP-1/GIP/glucagon triple agonists and GLP-1/GLP-2 co-agonists are demonstrating efficacy that single-receptor agents cannot match. The obesity market, projected to reach one hundred billion dollars by 2030, will drive investment in ever-more-sophisticated multi-target peptides.

3. The macrocycle pipeline will produce its first blockbuster. With 47 clinical-stage macrocycles and improving design tools, the probability of a major regulatory approval by 2028 is high. The first macrocycle to achieve one billion dollars in annual sales will validate the modality and unlock a wave of follow-on investment.

4. AI-designed peptides will reach pivotal trials. Four companies already have AI-designed peptides in clinical development. By 2028, the first AI-designed peptide will enter Phase III — a milestone that will fundamentally change how the industry allocates discovery resources.

5. Oral peptide delivery will expand beyond semaglutide. The commercial validation of oral semaglutide has opened the floodgates. Multiple oral peptide programs targeting metabolic disease, endocrinology, and CNS indications will enter Phase II/III by 2028. The oral peptide market could reach fifteen billion dollars by 2030.

The peptide therapeutics industry is no longer a niche. It is a pillar of modern drug development — and it is still in the early stages of its growth trajectory.

[Natural sign-off — one sentence summary of why this matters.]

Share this guide:XLinkedInEmail

Last reviewed: June 2026. Peptide Proof Editorial Team. This guide is updated quarterly to reflect new data and market developments.

- A word from our sponsors -

spot_img

Most Popular

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

More from Author

ICH M10 生效后:肽类血浆浓度的 LC-MS/MS 与 LBA 两条技术路线,验证参数差在哪

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — ICH M10 生物分析方法验证指南已在 ICH 框架下完成制定并进入各区域实施阶段,对色谱法与配体结合法的验证参数给出了统一框架,包括校准曲线、准确度与精密度、选择性、基质效应、稀释可靠性、稳定性、 carryover 与部分验证情形。对肽类而言,LC-MS/MS 直接测完整肽或特征肽段,而 LBA 依赖抗体识别,二者在选择性、基质干扰与内源性类似物交叉反应上的表现差异,决定了同一验证参数下的实验设

PFAS 限制提案把三氟乙酸纳入讨论:多肽裂解与纯化环节的试剂替代压力

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — 欧盟 REACH 框架下由多国主管机关提交的 PFAS 限制提案,覆盖范围包含三氟乙酸(TFA)等短链含氟物质,讨论中的方案对部分用途设有 derogation(豁免)与过渡期安排,正式限制范围与时间表以 ECHA 及欧盟委员会后续决定文件为准。TFA 在多肽固相合成中同时承担裂解鸡尾酒的关键组分与 RP-HPLC 流动相离子对试剂两个角色,是工艺上最难替换的含氟试剂之一。若产品用途可能落入豁免:优先

肽修饰导管表面的抗凝血评价:血流剪切与蛋白吸附试验条件怎么设定

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — 血液接触类导管做肽修饰后,体外抗凝血评价通常包含三类试验:静态血浆接触测凝血时间与补体激活、蛋白吸附试验测纤维蛋白原与白蛋白竞争吸附、以及流动条件下的血小板黏附与血栓形成观察。三类的剪切率量级差别很大,静脉导管内壁典型壁面剪切率处于数十到数百每秒区间,动脉或狭窄处可高出一到两个数量级,条件设定不同会改变结论方向。若目标为静脉留置场景:以对应剪切率范围的流动腔试验为主要证据,静态试验仅作筛查。若涂层在冲

GHK-Cu 水剂的光照暴露试验:铜价态、溶液颜色与降解产物的对应

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — GHK-Cu 为铜离子与三肽 GHK 形成的络合物,水溶液呈蓝色,其显色与二价铜的配位环境直接相关。光照暴露试验中常见的现象是颜色由蓝向绿或浅黄偏移,同时伴随 pH 下降与紫外可见光谱在可见区的吸收峰位移。颜色变化本身是观察指标,不是降解机理的证明;铜价态变化、配体氧化与配位构型改变都可能产生相似的视觉效果。若颜色变化伴随可见吸收峰位移且暗对照稳定:可判定为光致变化,需进一步做价态与降解产物表征。若暗

- A word from our sponsors -

spot_img

Read Now

ICH M10 生效后:肽类血浆浓度的 LC-MS/MS 与 LBA 两条技术路线,验证参数差在哪

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — ICH M10 生物分析方法验证指南已在 ICH 框架下完成制定并进入各区域实施阶段,对色谱法与配体结合法的验证参数给出了统一框架,包括校准曲线、准确度与精密度、选择性、基质效应、稀释可靠性、稳定性、 carryover 与部分验证情形。对肽类而言,LC-MS/MS 直接测完整肽或特征肽段,而 LBA 依赖抗体识别,二者在选择性、基质干扰与内源性类似物交叉反应上的表现差异,决定了同一验证参数下的实验设

PFAS 限制提案把三氟乙酸纳入讨论:多肽裂解与纯化环节的试剂替代压力

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — 欧盟 REACH 框架下由多国主管机关提交的 PFAS 限制提案,覆盖范围包含三氟乙酸(TFA)等短链含氟物质,讨论中的方案对部分用途设有 derogation(豁免)与过渡期安排,正式限制范围与时间表以 ECHA 及欧盟委员会后续决定文件为准。TFA 在多肽固相合成中同时承担裂解鸡尾酒的关键组分与 RP-HPLC 流动相离子对试剂两个角色,是工艺上最难替换的含氟试剂之一。若产品用途可能落入豁免:优先

肽修饰导管表面的抗凝血评价:血流剪切与蛋白吸附试验条件怎么设定

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — 血液接触类导管做肽修饰后,体外抗凝血评价通常包含三类试验:静态血浆接触测凝血时间与补体激活、蛋白吸附试验测纤维蛋白原与白蛋白竞争吸附、以及流动条件下的血小板黏附与血栓形成观察。三类的剪切率量级差别很大,静脉导管内壁典型壁面剪切率处于数十到数百每秒区间,动脉或狭窄处可高出一到两个数量级,条件设定不同会改变结论方向。若目标为静脉留置场景:以对应剪切率范围的流动腔试验为主要证据,静态试验仅作筛查。若涂层在冲

GHK-Cu 水剂的光照暴露试验:铜价态、溶液颜色与降解产物的对应

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — GHK-Cu 为铜离子与三肽 GHK 形成的络合物,水溶液呈蓝色,其显色与二价铜的配位环境直接相关。光照暴露试验中常见的现象是颜色由蓝向绿或浅黄偏移,同时伴随 pH 下降与紫外可见光谱在可见区的吸收峰位移。颜色变化本身是观察指标,不是降解机理的证明;铜价态变化、配体氧化与配位构型改变都可能产生相似的视觉效果。若颜色变化伴随可见吸收峰位移且暗对照稳定:可判定为光致变化,需进一步做价态与降解产物表征。若暗

抗老肽人体试验的皱纹测量:VISIA、PRIMOS 与硅胶复制三种方法的可比性

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — 抗老肽人体试验常用三类皱纹评价手段:VISIA 类二维成像依赖可见光与交叉偏振光成像并做图像分析;PRIMOS 属于条纹投影相移技术,可输出 Ra、Rz 等三维粗糙度参数;硅胶复制配合图像或轮廓仪分析则获得阴性复制面的形貌。三者测量的物理量不同——二维面积/斑点数、三维高度参数、复制面几何——同一受试者同一时间点的数值不可直接互换。若目标是宣称皱纹深度改善:优先采用三维形貌法并预先注册主要终点与统计模

观点:含肽保健食品引用的体外细胞试验,剂量换算链条常缺哪几环

信息日期:2026年11月7日 — 保健食品宣称常引用体外细胞试验,例如在 10–100 µg/mL 浓度下观察到抗氧化或胶原相关指标变化。但从培养液浓度到人体摄入量之间,至少需经过暴露时间、细胞接触面积与体液体积、口服后消化降解与首过代谢、血浆蛋白结合、组织分布五段换算,公开宣称材料往往只给出第一个数字。EFSA 关于健康声称的评估指南明确要求提供可归因于摄入量的因果链条,而非仅体外活性。若宣称材料只有体外数据:表述限定为'体外研究观

FDA 505(b)(2) 路径用于多肽长效制剂:桥接试验与处方变更要交的证据清单

信息日期:2026年11月6日 — 美国 FDA 的 505(b)(2) 申请允许申请人部分依赖已有文献或已批准产品的研究数据,无需完整重复全部安全有效性研究,但须就未被自身数据覆盖的部分提供桥接证据。多肽长效制剂通常通过改变释放行为、载体或给药间隔实现,这类变更会改变血药浓度曲线形状,即使总暴露量相近也不能直接推定安全有效性一致。FDA 已发布 505(b)(2) 申请相关指南文件,说明适用情形与需提交的内容框架。若变更仅涉及不影响释

2026 版 WADA 禁用清单生效:肽类激素的列目归属、阈值与参照物质怎么核

信息日期:2026年11月6日 — 世界反兴奋剂机构按年度发布禁用清单,新版清单通常于当年 1 月 1 日生效,并同步发布解释性文件与阈值说明。肽类激素、生长因子及相关物质归入 S2 类,其中部分条目明确列出具体物质名称,部分以类别描述涵盖相似结构与相似生物作用的衍生物;个别物质设有报告阈值或仅在使用特定给药途径时禁用。核对时应以当年生效版清单正文、配套的解释文件与技术文件为准,逐栏确认物质名称、列目位置与是否存在阈值。若所核物质在当年

FDA 的 II 型 DMF 清单里,多肽原料的持有人国别与品种集中度怎么读

信息日期:2026年11月6日 — 美国 FDA 的 Drug Master Files 数据库公开列出已备案的 DMF 编号、类型、状态与持有人名称,其中 II 型对应原料药、原料药中间体及其制备用物料。多肽原料通常以 II 型备案。清单本身可统计持有人所在国别分布、同一持有人下的多肽品种数量,以及处于活跃状态的文件比例,但清单不披露合成路线、产能、客户关系与商业条款,因此只能反映备案层面的供应格局,不能直接等同于实际供货份额。若目标

抗冻肽在冷冻面团里的冰晶重结晶抑制:质构、持水力与酵母存活率三项指标怎么并报

信息日期:2026年11月6日 — 冷冻面团在冻藏与解冻过程中,冰晶会因重结晶而长大,刺破面筋网络与酵母细胞,导致持水力下降、质构硬化与发酵力衰减。抗冻肽通过吸附于冰晶表面抑制冰晶生长与重结晶,从而在多次冻融循环后仍维持较小的冰晶尺寸。评价这类效果若只报单一质构数据,容易把配方差异误判为肽的作用,因此需要把质构、持水力与酵母存活率三项指标同步采集、同步报告,并明确各自的测量条件与冻融循环次数。若三项指标在设定冻融循环内同向改善且对照差异

欧盟药品立法一揽子方案进入三方谈判:含肽新药的数据保护期与 Bolar 例外怎么改

信息日期:2026年11月6日 — 欧盟委员会 2023 年 4 月提出药品立法一揽子方案,将现行指令与条例重构为一部通用药品法规加一部专门条例,核心改动包括把监管数据保护期由现行的 8 年缩短至 6 年,并配合市场投放后若干年内的延长机制;同时调整 Bolar 例外与生产豁免的适用口径。该方案须经欧洲议会与理事会三方谈判达成政治协议后才进入正式立法程序,条款文本在谈判中仍可能变化,因此任何独占期测算都应以最新谈判文本为准而非现行法。若

SPPS 中 N 端焦谷氨酸副产:哌啶脱保护循环次数与 LC-MS 识别的对应

信息日期:2026年11月6日 — 固相肽合成中,N 端谷氨酰胺或谷氨酸残基在哌啶/DMF 脱 Fmoc 的碱性环境中易分子内环化,生成焦谷氨酸(pGlu)封端副产;每一次脱保护循环都是一次暴露机会,循环次数越多、哌啶浓度与时间越长、树脂载量与溶剂洗涤效率越差,pGlu 累积越明显。该副产与目标肽质量仅差 NH3(约 17 Da),在 LC-MS 上表现为目标峰前或后的邻近峰,需靠高分辨质谱精确质量与 MS/MS 碎片确认,而非仅凭保留