Purification of cannabidiol from CBD oil by preparative HPLC

Significance of the Topic

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a non-intoxicating cannabinoid with growing medical and industrial applications. Regulatory requirements and therapeutic use demand high-purity CBD isolates free from tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other impurities. Preparative high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) offers a reliable route to achieve purity levels needed for pharmaceutical, nutraceutical, and research purposes.

Objectives and Study Overview

The study aimed to develop and scale a preparative HPLC protocol to purify CBD from a commercial CBD-rich oil. Starting with an analytical gradient method for quantification, the approach focused on increasing purity from 71.6% to over 94% while maintaining high recovery rates. The workflow included method development at the analytical scale, linear scale-up to preparative dimensions, and demonstration of fraction collection using a KNAUER AZURA system.

Methodology and Instrumentation

• Analytical quantification: Acetonitrile–water gradient on C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 3 μm); UV detection at 228 nm and 306 nm; calibration for CBD and CBG showed linearity (R>0.999).
• Analytical purification method: Two-step methanol–water gradient on C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 10 μm); sample solubility 50 mg/mL in 75/25 methanol/water; volume overload experiments validated linear response up to 20 μL injections.
• Preparative scale-up: Column bore increased to 50 mm (150 × 50 mm, 10 μm); flow rate raised to 140 mL/min; 15 mL sample injections via ternary low-pressure gradient module; fraction collection controlled with PurityChrom software.
• Instrumentation: AZURA P6.1L LPG pump, AZURA AS 6.1L autosampler, AZURA DAD2.1L detector, PurityChromBasic software, C18 preparative column, CT2.1 column thermostat.

Main Results and Discussion

• Initial oil analysis: CBD represented 71.6% of identified cannabinoids, CBG 2.6%, with remaining 25.8% as other compounds.
• Purification outcome: From a 15 mL injection of oil (750 mg), approximately 40 mg of CBD was collected at 94.5% purity, corresponding to full recovery of target CBD and complete separation from early- and late-eluting impurities.
• Throughput: A single 12-minute run enabled 0.2 g CBD per hour (1.6 g per 8-hour day) under optimized conditions.
• Yield considerations: Overall yield was limited by the initial CBD concentration and its solubility in methanol; higher sample concentration or alternative solvents could improve productivity.

Benefits and Practical Applications

The described workflow demonstrates how preparative HPLC can deliver high-purity CBD suitable for pharmaceutical or nutraceutical use. Conducting method optimization at the analytical scale minimizes sample consumption, solvent use, and development time. The linear scale-up strategy illustrates straightforward translation to preparative formats, allowing laboratories to adopt similar protocols for other cannabinoids or complex natural matrices.

Future Trends and Applications

• Exploration of alternative solvents (ethanol, acetonitrile, normal phase systems) to enhance CBD solubility and yield.
• Integration of automated fraction collection and real-time peak recognition to increase throughput and reproducibility.
• Application of preparative HPLC to other minor cannabinoids and complex botanical extracts under evolving regulatory frameworks.
• Combination with orthogonal purification techniques (e.g., supercritical fluid chromatography) for multi-step polishing of high-value compounds.

Conclusion

This study presents an efficient preparative HPLC protocol for isolating CBD from commercial oils, achieving >94% purity and complete target recovery. The approach underscores the value of method development at analytical scale, linear scale-up, and the use of flexible HPLC systems to meet purity and throughput requirements for research and industry.

References

• Bonini SA, et al. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2018;227:300–315.
• Amin MR, Ali DW. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. 2019;1162:151–165.
• ElSohly MA, et al. Prog Chem Org Nat Prod. 2017;103:1–36.
• Lafaye G, et al. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2017;19(3):309–316.
• Pisanti S, et al. Pharmacol Ther. 2017;175:133–150.
• Loxterkamp L, Monks K. KNAUER Application Note. 2020.
• Krauke Y, Monks K. KNAUER Application Note. 2020.