Scientific Publications by FDA Staff

J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv 2016 Apr;29(2):196-206

In vitro tests for aerosol deposition. IV: simulating variations in human breath profiles for realistic DPI testing.

Delvadia RR, Wei X, Longest PW, Venitz J, Byron PR

BACKGROUND: The amount of drug aerosol from an inhaler that can pass through an in vitro model of the mouth and throat (MT) during a realistic breath or inhalation flow rate vs. time profile (IP) is designated the total lung dose in vitro, or TLDin vitro. This article describes a clinical study that enabled us to recommend a general method of selecting IPs for use with powder inhalers of known airflow resistance (R) provided subjects followed written instructions either alone or in combination with formal training. METHODS: In a drug-free clinical trial, inhaler-naive, nonsmoking healthy adult human volunteers were screened for normal pulmonary function. IPs were collected from each volunteer inhaling through different air flow resistances after different levels of training. IPs were analyzed to determine the distribution of inhalation variables across the population and their dependence on training and airflow resistance. RESULTS: Equations for IP simulation are presented that describe the data including confidence limits at each resistance and training condition. Realistic IPs at upper (90%), median (50%), and lower (10%) confidence limits were functions of R and training. Peak inspiratory flow rates (PIFR) were inversely proportional to R so that if R was assigned, values for PIFR could be calculated. The time of PIFR, TPIFR, and the total inhaled volume (V) were unrelated to R, but dependent on training. Once R was assigned for a powder inhaler to be tested, a range of simulated IPs could be generated for the different training scenarios. Values for flow rate acceleration and depth of inspiration could also be varied within the population limits of TPIFR and V. CONCLUSIONS: The use of simulated IPs, in concert with realistic in vitro testing, should improve the DPI design process and the confidence with which clinical testing may be initiated for a chosen device.