Absorption and Extraction of Inflammatory Mediators From Contact Lens Materials.

Cecilia Chao, K. Richdale, M. Willcox
{"title":"Absorption and Extraction of Inflammatory Mediators From Contact Lens Materials.","authors":"Cecilia Chao, K. Richdale, M. Willcox","doi":"10.1097/ICL.0000000000000576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVES\nThis report aimed to explore whether certain inflammatory mediators were absorbed, extracted, or bound by various contact lens materials.\n\n\nMETHODS\nComfilcon A, balafilcon A, omafilcon A, and etafilcon A were soaked in 500 and 100 pg/mL of interleukin-8 (IL-8), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), or interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra), and also in combined solutions of inflammatory mediators (500 pg/mL or 100 pg/mL) separately. Lenses were then extracted in 1:1 2% trifluoroacetic acid:acetonitrile. The extracted and residual concentrations of inflammatory mediators were determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Absorbed (control-residual) and firmly bound (absorbed-extracted) concentrations were calculated for analysis.\n\n\nRESULTS\nMore MMP-9 was absorbed by omafilcon A (466±9 pg/mL) than balafilcon A (P=0.006; 437±11 pg/mL) or etafilcon A (P=0.001; 428±13 pg/mL) when soaked in 500 pg/mL, but no differences in 100 pg/mL. More MMP-9 remained firmly bound to omafilcon A (P=0.03; 174±3 pg/mL), comfilcon A (P=0.049; 168±34 pg/mL), and balafilcon A (P=0.01; 186±14 pg/mL) than etafilcon A (128±22 pg/mL). There were no differences in IL-8 absorption between lenses; however, more IL-8 remained firmly bound to omafilcon A (P=0.01; 336±25 pg/mL) than etafilcon A (106±133 pg/mL) when soaked in 500 pg/mL. No differences were found in concentrations of absorbed or firmly bound IL-1Ra between materials. When the mediators were combined, IL-8 was absorbed more in etafilcon A (P=0.03) than in other lens materials, but the absorbed IL-8 did not remain firmly bound.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe uptake and extraction of inflammatory mediators from contact lenses was affected by competitive binding between the mediators.","PeriodicalId":12216,"journal":{"name":"Eye & Contact Lens: Science & Clinical Practice","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye & Contact Lens: Science & Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000576","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

OBJECTIVES This report aimed to explore whether certain inflammatory mediators were absorbed, extracted, or bound by various contact lens materials. METHODS Comfilcon A, balafilcon A, omafilcon A, and etafilcon A were soaked in 500 and 100 pg/mL of interleukin-8 (IL-8), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), or interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra), and also in combined solutions of inflammatory mediators (500 pg/mL or 100 pg/mL) separately. Lenses were then extracted in 1:1 2% trifluoroacetic acid:acetonitrile. The extracted and residual concentrations of inflammatory mediators were determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Absorbed (control-residual) and firmly bound (absorbed-extracted) concentrations were calculated for analysis. RESULTS More MMP-9 was absorbed by omafilcon A (466±9 pg/mL) than balafilcon A (P=0.006; 437±11 pg/mL) or etafilcon A (P=0.001; 428±13 pg/mL) when soaked in 500 pg/mL, but no differences in 100 pg/mL. More MMP-9 remained firmly bound to omafilcon A (P=0.03; 174±3 pg/mL), comfilcon A (P=0.049; 168±34 pg/mL), and balafilcon A (P=0.01; 186±14 pg/mL) than etafilcon A (128±22 pg/mL). There were no differences in IL-8 absorption between lenses; however, more IL-8 remained firmly bound to omafilcon A (P=0.01; 336±25 pg/mL) than etafilcon A (106±133 pg/mL) when soaked in 500 pg/mL. No differences were found in concentrations of absorbed or firmly bound IL-1Ra between materials. When the mediators were combined, IL-8 was absorbed more in etafilcon A (P=0.03) than in other lens materials, but the absorbed IL-8 did not remain firmly bound. CONCLUSIONS The uptake and extraction of inflammatory mediators from contact lenses was affected by competitive binding between the mediators.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
隐形眼镜材料中炎症介质的吸收与提取。
目的探讨不同的隐形眼镜材料是否会吸收、提取或结合某些炎症介质。方法将康菲康A、balafilcon A、omafilcon A和etafilcon A分别浸泡在500和100 pg/mL的白细胞介素-8 (IL-8)、基质金属蛋白酶-9 (MMP-9)或白细胞介素-1受体拮抗剂(IL-1Ra)中,以及炎症介质(500 pg/mL或100 pg/mL)的联合溶液中。然后用2%三氟乙酸:乙腈1:1的溶液提取晶状体。采用酶联免疫吸附法测定炎症介质的提取和残留浓度。计算吸收(对照-残留)和固结合(吸收-萃取)浓度进行分析。结果omafilcon A对MMP-9的吸收率(466±9 pg/mL)高于balafilcon A (P=0.006;437±11 pg/mL)或依他非康A (P=0.001;500 pg/mL时(428±13 pg/mL), 100 pg/mL时无差异。更多的MMP-9仍然与omafilcon A紧密结合(P=0.03;174±3 pg/mL),舒张素A (P=0.049;168±34 pg/mL), balafilcon A (P=0.01;(186±14 pg/mL)高于依他非康A(128±22 pg/mL)。不同镜片间IL-8吸收率无差异;然而,更多的IL-8仍然牢固地结合在omafilcon A上(P=0.01;(336±25 pg/mL)比(106±133 pg/mL)好。在不同的材料之间,没有发现吸收或牢固结合的IL-1Ra浓度的差异。当介质联合使用时,依他非康A对IL-8的吸收率高于其他透镜材料(P=0.03),但吸收的IL-8并未保持牢固结合。结论隐形眼镜中炎症介质的吸收和提取受介质间竞争结合的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical Profile and Treatment Outcomes of Patients With Acremonium Species Positive Keratitis Managed in a Tertiary Eye Care Center Efficacy of the Image-Guided Alignment System for a Four-Haptic Hydrophobic Monofocal Toric Intraocular Lens Evaluation of Ocular Surface Characteristics in Dry Eye Disease With and Without Soft Contact Lens Wear: A Comparative Study Change in Risk Score and Behaviors of Soft Contact Lens Wearers After Targeted Patient Education Corneal Response to Scleral Contact Lens Wear in Keratoconus
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1