1
Return

An approach for the evaluation of closed system drug-transfer devices for transfer accuracy, particle release, and material-of-construction information

delete2026-06-13
delete0
PRE
AI
C
Christian Lehermayr *
S
Sy Gebrekidan
S
Serene Jabary
A
Adithi C. Bhargava
M
Mollie Daugherty
B
Benjamin Patrick Werner
N
Nicholas Clark
E
Elissa M. Grzincic
S
Shubhadra N. Singh
P
Praval Shah
J
John F. Seeler
K
Katiria Flores
N
Naila El-Kechai
B
Björn‐Hendrik Peters
DOI:10.1016/j.xphs.2026.104359delete
deleteOriginal
deleteOriginal request for help
deleteShare
deleteSave
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
A Closed System Drug-Transfer Device (CSTD) is designed to prevent hazardous drugs from escaping their containers, thereby effectively safeguarding healthcare professionals from potential exposure. However, variations among CSTD designs may affect dose accuracy and overall quality of the drug product. This article proposes a standardized approach for evaluating CSTDs irrespective of product type. It addresses three critical attributes: transfer volume accuracy through residual hold-up volume measurements, device-related particle generation after exposure to drug surrogate solution, and standardized provision of comprehensive material-of-construction (MoC) data for all drug-contact components. The approach includes volume transfer across multiple vial sizes using a surfactant-containing surrogate solution at different viscosities to quantify dosing accuracy and residual loss after simulated use. The process also incorporates standardized particle analysis including USP <788> to detect subvisible particles shed by the device(s) after simulated use. A comprehensive and uniform MoC overview is also recommended to evaluate compatibility and monitor material modifications. The adoption of such a standardized approach by CSTD manufacturers would provide pharmaceutical companies with critical data to inform overfill requirements and compatibility assessments. Furthermore, it may potentially decrease the necessity for drug product-specific studies. Similarly, it may allow healthcare practitioners to enhance their compounding and administration practices by integrating CSTD performance data into their decision-making processes. In summary, adopting this harmonized evaluation framework for CSTDs would streamline device evaluation and integration in clinical practice, while safeguarding drug product quality and patient safety.

Journal

Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences cover
Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
IF:
3.8
Papers:
1.1W
Citations:
2.6W

Organization

P
pivotal biologics
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
D
drug product development
Scholars:
6
Papers: 3
Citations: 0
A
amgen
Scholars:
192
Papers: 69
Citations: 0
P
pfizer
Scholars:
656
Papers: 202
Citations: 0
P
parenteral drug product development
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
A
abbvie inc.
Scholars:
206
Papers: 39
Citations: 0
S
Sanofi
Scholars:
537
Papers: 136
Citations: 0
B
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG
Scholars:
118
Papers: 37
Citations: 1
D
drug product development steriles
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
P
pharmaceutical development
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
I
injectable drug product development
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
B
biologics drug product development
Scholars:
4
Papers: 3
Citations: 0
Cited Papers

Cited Papers

Citing Papers

Citing Papers