Robert K Roden, Nathan Zuniga, Joshua C Wright, David H Parkinson, Fangfang Jiang, Leena M Patil, Rebecca S Burlett, Alyssa A Nitz, Joshua J Rogers, Jarett T Pittman, Kenneth L Virgin, P Christine Ackroyd, Samuel H Payne, John C Price, Kenneth A Christensen
{"title":"Human tear film protein sampling using soft contact lenses.","authors":"Robert K Roden, Nathan Zuniga, Joshua C Wright, David H Parkinson, Fangfang Jiang, Leena M Patil, Rebecca S Burlett, Alyssa A Nitz, Joshua J Rogers, Jarett T Pittman, Kenneth L Virgin, P Christine Ackroyd, Samuel H Payne, John C Price, Kenneth A Christensen","doi":"10.1186/s12014-024-09475-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Human tear protein biomarkers are useful for detecting ocular and systemic diseases. Unfortunately, existing tear film sampling methods (Schirmer strip; SS and microcapillary tube; MCT) have significant drawbacks, such as pain, risk of injury, sampling difficulty, and proteomic disparities between methods. Here, we present an alternative tear protein sampling method using soft contact lenses (SCLs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We optimized the SCL protein sampling in vitro and performed in vivo studies in 6 subjects. Using Etafilcon A SCLs and 4M guanidine-HCl for protein removal, we sampled an average of 60 ± 31 µg of protein per eye. We also performed objective and subjective assessments of all sampling methods. Signs of irritation post-sampling were observed with SS but not with MCT and SCLs. Proteomic analysis by mass spectrometry (MS) revealed that all sampling methods resulted in the detection of abundant tear proteins. However, smaller subsets of unique and shared proteins were identified, particularly for SS and MCT. Additionally, there was no significant intrasubject variation between MCT and SCL sampling.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These experiments demonstrate that SCLs are an accessible tear-sampling method with the potential to surpass current methods in sampling basal tears.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10936081/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12014-024-09475-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Human tear protein biomarkers are useful for detecting ocular and systemic diseases. Unfortunately, existing tear film sampling methods (Schirmer strip; SS and microcapillary tube; MCT) have significant drawbacks, such as pain, risk of injury, sampling difficulty, and proteomic disparities between methods. Here, we present an alternative tear protein sampling method using soft contact lenses (SCLs).
Results: We optimized the SCL protein sampling in vitro and performed in vivo studies in 6 subjects. Using Etafilcon A SCLs and 4M guanidine-HCl for protein removal, we sampled an average of 60 ± 31 µg of protein per eye. We also performed objective and subjective assessments of all sampling methods. Signs of irritation post-sampling were observed with SS but not with MCT and SCLs. Proteomic analysis by mass spectrometry (MS) revealed that all sampling methods resulted in the detection of abundant tear proteins. However, smaller subsets of unique and shared proteins were identified, particularly for SS and MCT. Additionally, there was no significant intrasubject variation between MCT and SCL sampling.
Conclusions: These experiments demonstrate that SCLs are an accessible tear-sampling method with the potential to surpass current methods in sampling basal tears.