The
demand for rapid column screening, computer-assisted method
development and method transfer, and unambiguous compound identification
by LC/MS analyses has pushed analysts to adopt experimental protocols
and software for the accurate prediction of the retention time in
liquid chromatography (LC). This Perspective discusses the classical
approaches used to predict retention times in LC over the last three
decades and proposes future requirements to increase their accuracy.
First, inverse methods for retention prediction are essentially applied
during screening and gradient method optimization: a minimum number
of experiments or design of experiments (DoE) is run to train and
calibrate a model (either purely statistical or based on the principles
and fundamentals of liquid chromatography) by a mere fitting process.
They do not require the accurate knowledge of the true column hold-up
volume V
0, system dwell volume V
dwell (in gradient elution), and the retention
behavior (k versus the content of strong solvent
φ, temperature T, pH, and ionic strength I) of the analytes. Their relative accuracy is often excellent
below a few percent. Statistical methods are expected to be the most
attractive to handle very complex retention behavior such as in mixed-mode
chromatography (MMC). Fundamentally correct retention models accounting
for the simultaneous impact of φ, I, pH, and T in MMC are needed for method development based on chromatography
principles. Second, direct methods for retention prediction are ideally
suited for accurate method transfer from one column/system configuration
to another: these quality by design (QbD) methods are based on the
fundamentals and principles of solid–liquid adsorption and
gradient chromatography. No model calibration is necessary; however,
they require universal conventions for the accurate determination
of true retention factors (for 1 < k < 30)
as a function of the experimental variables (φ, T, pH, and I) and of the true column/system parameters
(V
0, V
dwell, dispersion volume, σ, and relaxation volume, τ, of
the programmed gradient profile at the column inlet and gradient distortion
at the column outlet). Finally, when the molecular structure of the
analytes is either known or assumed, retention prediction has essentially
been made on the basis of statistical approaches such as the linear
solvation energy relationships (LSERs) and the quantitative structure
retention relationships (QSRRs): their ability to accurately predict
the retention remains limited within 10–30%. They have been
combined with molecular similarity approaches (where the retention
model is calibrated with compounds having structures similar to that
of the targeted analytes) and artificial intelligence algorithms to
further improve their accuracy below 10%. In this Perspective, it
is proposed to adopt a more rigorous and fundamental approach by considering
the very details of the solid–liquid adsorption process: Monte
Carlo (MC) or molecular dynamics (MD) simulations are promising tools
to explain and interpret ...