ArticlePharmaceutical research2023
Near Elimination of In Vitro Predicted Extrathoracic Aerosol Deposition in Children Using a Spray-Dried Antibiotic Formulation and Pediatric Air-Jet DPI.
Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid and Efficient Aerosol Delivery During 60 L/min High Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy-In Vitro Development of a Novel Dry Powder Delivery Platform.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Article
- Characterization of Pediatric Extrathoracic Aerosol Deposition with Air-Jet Dry Powder Inhalers.Journal of aerosol science · 2025Article
- Inhalable tobramycin EEG powder formulation for treating Pseudomonas aeruginosa-induced lung infection.International journal of pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Recent Developments in Aerosol Pulmonary Drug Delivery: New Technologies, New Cargos, and New Targets.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2024Review
- Advances in Pulmonary Drug Delivery Systems and Inhalation Formulations.Pharmaceutical research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the in vitro aerosol performance of a dry powder antibiotic product that combined a highly dispersible tobramycin powder with a previously optimized pediatric air-jet dry powder inhaler (DPI) across a subject age range of 2-10 years.
methodsAn excipient enhanced growth (EEG) formulation of the antibiotic tobramycin (Tobi) was prepared using a small particle spray drying technique that included mannitol as the hygroscopic excipient and trileucine as the dispersion enhancer. The Tobi-EEG formulation was aerosolized using a positive-pressure pediatric air-jet DPI that included a 3D rod array. Realistic in vitro experiments were conducted in representative airway models consistent with children in the age ranges of 2-3, 5-6 and 9-10 years using oral or nose-to-lung administration, non-humidified or humidified airway conditions, and constant or age-specific air volumes.
resultsAcross all conditions tested, mouth-throat depositional loss was < 1% and nose-throat depositional loss was < 3% of loaded dose. Lung delivery efficiency was in the range of 77.3-85.1% of loaded dose with minor variations based on subject age (~ 8% absolute difference), oral or nasal administration (< 2%), and delivered air volume (< 2%). Humidified airway conditions had an insignificant impact on extrathoracic depositional loss and significantly increased aerosol size at the exit of a representative lung chamber.
conclusionsIn conclusion, the inhaled antibiotic product nearly eliminated extrathoracic depositional loss, demonstrated high efficiency nose-to-lung antibiotic aerosol delivery in pediatric airway models for the first time, and provided ~ 80% lung delivery efficiency with little variability across subject age and administered air volume.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.