Since nitrosamines (NAs) were first detected in pharmaceutical products in July 2018, new quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) strategies have emerged. However, few studies have explored the use of conventional FTMIR or ATR-FTMIR spectroscopy for quantifying these impurities. This study evaluated and compared the analytical performance of both ATR-FTMIR and FTMIR KBr-pellet methods for the quantification of four nitrosamines: NDMA, NDEA, NDIPA, and NDBA. Limits of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) were determined for each compound using both techniques. Initially, NDEA was analyzed in methanol solution; subsequently, all four nitrosamines were assessed in potassium bromide (KBr) matrices using both methodologies simultaneously. For NDEA in methanol, the ATR-FTMIR method yielded an LOD of 2.77 × 10⁻³% (v/v) and an LOQ of 9.22 × 10⁻³% (v/v). For NDMA analyzed by ATR-FTMIR with KBr, the LOD and LOQ were approximately 4.94 × 10⁻⁴% and 1.65 × 10⁻³%, respectively. The best sensitivity was achieved for NDBA using the FTMIR KBr-pellet method, which gave the lowest overall values: an LOD of 5.52 × 10⁻⁶% and an LOQ of 1.83 × 10⁻⁵%. The four nitrosamines exhibited distinct physicochemical properties that influenced their spectral responses and, consequently, their analytical performance under the tested conditions. When comparing the two techniques, only the FTMIR KBr-pellet method yielded LODs within regulatory limits for the qualitative detection of NDBA and NDIPA, indicating its superior sensitivity for these compounds.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martini et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: