» Articles » PMID: 38362183

Inhaled Fosamprenavir for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Toxicology and Fluid Dynamics Modeling

Abstract

Objectives: Approximately 25% of Americans suffer from laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), a disease for which no effective medical therapy exists. Pepsin is a predominant source of damage during LPR and a key therapeutic target. Fosamprenavir (FOS) inhibits pepsin and prevents damage in an LPR mouse model. Inhaled FOS protects at a lower dose than oral; however, the safety of inhaled FOS is unknown and there are no inhalers for laryngopharyngeal delivery. A pre-Good Lab Practice (GLP) study of inhaled FOS was performed to assess safety and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling used to predict the optimal particle size for a laryngopharyngeal dry powder inhaler (DPI).

Methods: Aerosolized FOS, amprenavir (APR), or air (control) were provided 5 days/week for 4 weeks ( = 6) in an LPR mouse model. Organs (nasal cavity, larynx, esophagus, trachea, lung, liver, heart, and kidney) were assessed by a pathologist and bronchoalveolar lavage cytokines and plasma cardiotoxicity markers were assessed by Luminex assay. CFD simulations were conducted in a model of a healthy 49-year-old female.

Results: No significant increase was observed in histologic lesions, cytokines, or cardiotoxicity markers in FOS or APR groups relative to the control. CFD predicted that laryngopharyngeal deposition was maximized with aerodynamic diameters of 8.1-11.5 μm for inhalation rates of 30-60 L/min.

Conclusions: A 4-week pre-GLP study supports the safety of inhaled FOS. A formal GLP assessment is underway to support a phase I clinical trial of an FOS DPI for LPR.

Level Of Evidence: NA.

Citing Articles

Pathogenesis of pepsin-induced gastroesophageal reflux disease with advanced diagnostic tools and therapeutic implications.

Li C, Cao X, Wang H Front Med (Lausanne). 2025; 12:1516335.

PMID: 40046936 PMC: 11880273. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1516335.


Inhaled fosamprenavir for laryngopharyngeal reflux: Toxicology and fluid dynamics modeling.

Lesnick A, Samuels T, Seabloom D, Wuertz B, Ojha A, Seelig D Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2024; 9(1):e1219.

PMID: 38362183 PMC: 10866582. DOI: 10.1002/lio2.1219.

References
1.
Connor N, Palazzi-Churas K, Cohen S, Leverson G, Bless D . Symptoms of extraesophageal reflux in a community-dwelling sample. J Voice. 2006; 21(2):189-202. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2005.10.006. View

2.
Klimara M, Randall D, Allen J, Figueredo E, Johnston N . Proximal reflux: biochemical mediators, markers, therapeutic targets, and clinical correlations. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2020; 1481(1):127-138. DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14366. View

3.
Roh J, Yoon Y . Effect of acid and pepsin on glottic wound healing: a simulated reflux model. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006; 132(9):995-1000. DOI: 10.1001/archotol.132.9.995. View

4.
Kelly E, Samuels T, Johnston N . Chronic pepsin exposure promotes anchorage-independent growth and migration of a hypopharyngeal squamous cell line. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013; 150(4):618-24. PMC: 4423599. DOI: 10.1177/0194599813517862. View

5.
Tan J, Wang L, Mo T, Wang J, Wang M, Li X . Pepsin promotes IL-8 signaling-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition in laryngeal carcinoma. Cancer Cell Int. 2019; 19:64. PMC: 6425698. DOI: 10.1186/s12935-019-0772-7. View