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.
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信