Evidence Hub

Chromatographic Characterization of Nasal and Inhalation Drug Products: A Review of Liquid Chromatography Strategies for Formulation Assessment, Particle Size Correlation, and In Vitro Performance Testing

Madamsetti N, Aele M, Godishala V, Velidandi A

Biomedical chromatography : BMC, 2026

Abstract

Liquid chromatography (LC) has become indispensable for characterizing nasal and inhalation drug products, yet a critical gap persists in integrating chromatographic data with particle size metrics and in vitro performance outcomes to predict in vivo behavior. This review highlights recent advances in LC strategies from reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography to ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; across three interconnected domains: formulation physicochemical characterization, aerodynamic particle size distribution determination, and comprehensive in vitro performance testing. We critically evaluated how LC-based quantification enables simultaneous active pharmaceutical ingredient and impurity profiling, dissolution kinetics assessment, and regional deposition mapping, with method validation data demonstrating linearity spanning three to four orders of magnitude and limits of detection as low as 5 pg/mL. Notably, we highlighted the mechanistic discrimination of erosion-vs. diffusion-controlled release enabled by simultaneous active pharmaceutical ingredient-polymer dissolution profiling and established quantitative correlations between particle size and systemic bioavailability. The review identified persistent challenges in biorelevant dissolution standardization and device-formulation interaction modeling while proposing integrated frameworks for bioequivalence prediction. This comprehensive perspective positions LC not…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a review, done in cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free