H+/K+ATPase Expression in the Larynx of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Laryngeal Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVES: The gastric H+/K+ ATPase proton pump has previously been shown to be expressed in the human larynx, however its contribution to laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) signs, symptoms and associated diseases such as laryngeal cancer is unknown. Proton pump expression in the larynx of patients with LPR and laryngeal cancer was investigated herein. A human hypopharyngeal cell line expressing the proton pump was generated to investigate its effects. STUDY DESIGN: In-vitro translational. METHODS: Laryngeal biopsies were obtained from three LPR and eight LSCC patients. ATP4A, ATP4B and HRPT1 were assayed via qPCR. Human hypopharyngeal FaDu cell lines stably expressing proton pump were created using lentiviral transduction and examined via transmission electron microscopy and qPCR for genes associated with inflammation or laryngeal cancer. RESULTS: Expression of ATP4A and ATP4B was detected in 3/3 LPR, 4/8 LSCC-tumor and 3/8 LSCC-adjacent specimens. Expression of ATP4A and ATP4B in FaDu elicited mitochondrial damage and expression of IL1B, PTGS2, and TNFA (P < .0001); expression of ATP4B alone did not. CONCLUSIONS: Gastric proton pump subunits are expressed in the larynx of LPR and LSCC patients. Mitochondrial damage and changes in gene expression observed in cells expressing the full proton pump, absent in those expressing a single subunit, suggest that acid secretion by functional proton pumps expressed in upper airway mucosa may elicit local cell and molecular changes associated with inflammation and cancer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:130-135, 2021.

Association of pepsin and DNA damage in laryngopharyngeal reflux-related vocal fold polyps.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate if laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) plays a role as a risk factor for vocal fold polyps (VFPs), and if pepsin is associated with higher oxidative DNA damage of VFPs in the presence of LPR. METHODS: Thirty patients with VFPs were recruited between 2017 and 2018. Prior to surgery, a laryngoscopy was performed on all subjects to evaluate VFPs. Polyp tissue and saliva samples were obtained scrupulously. Hematoxylin-eosin staining was performed for pathologic analysis. Immunohistochemistry and ELISA were used to detect pepsin in tissue and saliva of VFP patients. 8-OHdG and p-H2AX expression was detected to measure oxidative DNA damage in tissue. DNA damage was investigated in human immortalized laryngeal epithelial cells exposed to pepsin. RESULTS: The pepsin concentration in saliva was significantly higher (t = 2.38, P = .024) in the pepsin positive group. There was no significant difference in pepsin expression at different sites and pathological subtypes of VFPs. The levels of 8-OHdG and p-H2AX were significantly higher in the pepsin positive group and positively correlated with the tissue expression of pepsin. The concentration of pepsin in saliva also showed a significant correlation with 8-OHdG levels. Expression of 8-OHdG and p-H2AX, and tail moment of the comet assay were elevated in human immortalized laryngeal epithelial cells following treatment with pepsin. CONCLUSION: Patients with VFPs have higher levels of oxidative DNA damage in the presence of pepsin reflux. Pepsin may induce DNA damage in laryngeal epithelial cells and participate in the pathogenesis of VFPs.

Activation of TRPV1 and TRPM8 Channels in the Larynx and Associated Laryngopharyngeal Regions Facilitates the Swallowing Reflex.

The larynx and associated laryngopharyngeal regions are innervated by the superior laryngeal nerve (SLN) and are highly reflexogenic. Transient receptor potential (TRP) channels have recently been detected in SLN innervated regions; however, their involvement in the swallowing reflex has not been fully elucidated. Here, we explore the contribution of two TRP channels, TRPV1 and TRPM8, located in SLN-innervated regions to the swallowing reflex. Immunohistochemistry identified TRPV1 and TRPM8 on cell bodies of SLN afferents located in the nodose-petrosal-jugular ganglionic complex. The majority of TRPV1 and TRPM8 immunoreactivity was located on unmyelinated neurons. Topical application of different concentrations of TRPV1 and TRPM8 agonists modulated SLN activity. Application of the agonists evoked a significantly greater number of swallowing reflexes compared with the number evoked by distilled water. The interval between the reflexes evoked by the agonists was shorter than that produced by distilled water. Prior topical application of respective TRPV1 or TRPM8 antagonists significantly reduced the number of agonist-evoked reflexes. The findings suggest that the activation of TRPV1 and TRPM8 channels present in the swallowing-related regions can facilitate the evoking of swallowing reflex. Targeting the TRP channels could be a potential therapeutic strategy for the management of dysphagia.

Does gene expression in laryngeal subsites differ between patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux and controls?

OBJECTIVE: To identify laryngeal mRNA gene changes in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). METHOD: Laryngeal biopsies from non-smoking LPR patients (n=10; Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) >12 and a Reflux Finding Score (RFS) >6) and controls (n=9; RSI <12 and RFS <6) were collected from four subsites (true vocal cord, false vocal cord, medial arytenoid and posterior commissure) of the larynx. qRT-PCR analyses were conducted on 20 reflux- and inflammation-related genes, including interleukins 6 and 8, cytokeratins 8 and 14, mucin genes MUC1, MUC2, MUC3B, MUC4, MUC5B, MUC6 and MUC7 and carbonic anhydrase III. Statistical analysis (Mann-Whitney U test) compared gene expression levels between LPR and control groups at each subsite. RESULTS: Site-specific differences in squamous metaplasia and gene expression were noted in LPR patients, with the majority present in the medial arytenoid region. Significant.differences were noted in genes related to mucosal defence and inflammation, including CRNN, CD1d, TGFß-1, MUC2, MUC5B and CDH1. CONCLUSION: Whilst the posterior commissure is commonly identified as the area demonstrating the most significant macroscopic change in LPR, the histological changes and genes assessed here showed more pronounced LPR associated differences in the medial arytenoid. We identified differences in expression of mucin genes, cytokeratin-14 and molecular markers of inflammation. Whilst some of these changes may be metaplasia-related, further evaluation of the mRNA expression of these genes may provide a useful biomarker panel for diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring of LPR.

New aspects in the pathomechanism and diagnosis of the laryngopharyngeal reflux-clinical impact of laryngeal proton pumps and pharyngeal pH metry in extraesophageal gastroesophageal reflux disease.

AIM: To determine the laryngeal H+K+-ATPase and pharyngeal pH in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)-symptoms as well as to assess the symptom scores during PPI therapy. METHODS: Endoscopy was performed to exclude neoplasia and to collect biopsies from the posterior cricoid area (immunohistochemistry and PCR analysis). Immunohistochemical staining was performed with monoclonal mouse antibodies against human H+K+-ATPase. Quantitative real-time RT-PCR for each of the H+K+-ATPase subunits was performed. The pH values were assessed in the aerosolized environment of the oropharynx (DxpH Catheter) and compared to a subsequently applied combined pH/MII measurement. RESULTS: Twenty patients with LPR symptoms were included. In only one patient, the laryngeal H+K+-ATPase was verified by immunohistochemical staining. In another patient, real-time RT-PCR for each H+K+-ATPase subunit was positive. Fourteen out of twenty patients had pathological results in DxpH, and 6/20 patients had pathological results in pH/MII. Four patients had pathological results in both functional tests. Nine out of twenty patients responded to PPIs. CONCLUSION: The laryngeal H+K+-ATPase can only be sporadically detected in patients with LPR symptoms and is unlikely to cause the LPR symptoms. Alternative hypotheses for the pathomechanism are needed. The role of pharyngeal pH-metry remains unclear and its use can only be recommended for patients in a research study setting.

Role of pepsin and pepsinogen: linking laryngopharyngeal reflux with otitis media with effusion in children.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To analyze the relationship between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) represented by pepsin and pepsinogen, and pathogenesis of otitis media with effusion (OME). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case-control study. METHODS: Children with OME who required adenoidectomy and tympanostomy/tympanostomy tubes placement were enrolled in OME group, whereas children with adenoid hypertrophy (AH) who required adenoidectomy and individuals who required cochlear implantation (CI) were enrolled in AH and CI groups, respectively. Pepsinogen mRNA and protein levels were assessed by real-time fluorescence-based quantitative polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemistry in adenoid specimens from the OME and AH groups. Pepsin and pepsinogen concentrations were evaluated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in middle ear fluid and plasma from the OME and CI groups. RESULTS: The levels of pepsinogen protein expressed in cytoplasm of epithelial cells and clearance under epithelial cells in adenoid specimens from the OME group were significantly higher than those in the AH group. Furthermore, the concentrations of pepsin and pepsinogen in the OME group were 51.93±11.58 ng/mL and 728±342.6 ng/mL, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the CI group (P<.001). In addition, the concentrations of pepsin in dry ears were significantly lower than those in serous and mucus ears in the OME group (F=22.77, P<.001).Finally, the concentration of pepsinogen in middle ear effusion was positively correlated with the expression intensity of pepsinogen protein in cytoplasm of epithelial cells (r=0.73, P<.05) in the OME group. CONCLUSIONS: Pepsin and pepsinogen in middle ear effusion are probably caused by LPR and may be involved in the pathogenesis of OME. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.