ReviewACS omega2026
Advances in Formulation and Technological Strategies for Montelukast Pulmonary Delivery.
Review in ACS omega, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Montelukast is a leukotriene receptor antagonist used in the management of asthma by modulating airway inflammation. Conventional oral formulations exhibit considerable variation in bioavailability due to extensive first-pass metabolism, short half-life, and wide distribution into peripheral compartments. These limitations, along with systemic adverse effects, challenge consistent therapeutic outcomes. Pulmonary drug delivery has been proposed as a promising alternative by targeting the drug directly to the lungs, potentially bypassing first-pass metabolism and reducing systemic exposure. However, despite extensive research on inhalable montelukast formulations, no product has yet been commercialized. This review discusses the main challenges involved in formulating montelukast for pulmonary administration and highlights recent advances in particle engineering, nanocarriers, and formulation strategies to overcome these limitations. Considering the potential advantages of pulmonary delivery for montelukast, a literature search was conducted to identify inhalable formulations of the drug. Twenty articles were identified, including sixteen on DPIs, one on nebulized montelukast, one on pMDIs and two articles reporting results related to clinical studies of inhaled montelukast. Overall, three clinical studies specifically evaluated inhaled montelukast. No patents evaluating inhaled montelukast were found, although three patents mention inhalation as a possible route without disclosing actual inhaled formulations or device strategies. The available studies were analyzed according to formulation strategies, particle engineering approaches, inhalation devices, and reported outcomes. For DPI formulations, particle aerodynamic diameter plays a critical role in lung deposition, and a mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) in the range of 1-5 μm is generally considered optimal for lung deposition. After deposition, formulation performance depends on an initial burst release followed by sustained drug release, low epithelial permeability, and prolonged pulmonary retention, which are expected to minimize systemic exposure. Overall, the limited number of research highlights a translational gap and important opportunities for the development of inhalable montelukast therapies.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.