In Vitro Assessment of Medical Device Toxicity: Interactions of Benzalkonium Chloride With Silicone-Containing and p-HEMA–Containing Hydrogel Contact Lens Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the interactions of benzalkonium chloride (BAK) with silicone-containing (lotrafilcon A and galyfilcon A) and p-HEMA-containing (etafilcon A and vifilcon A) hydrogel contact lenses and to examine the possibility of using sodium fluorescein permeability assay (SFPA), 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol- 2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay and the bovine lens assay in conjunction with confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) as a battery of in vitro alternatives to evaluate the potential toxicity of soft contact lenses. METHODS: Four soft contact lens types (Focus Monthly [vifilcon A], Focus NIGHT & DAY [lotrafilcon A], ACUVUE Advance With Hydraclear [galyfilcon A], and SUREVUE [etafilcon A]) were soaked for 24 hours in various concentrations of BAK (1%, 0.1%, 0.01%, and 0.001%) in 20-mL glass vials. After 24 hours, the lenses were gently washed in Hanks' Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS), placed in 5 mL of HBSS, and incubated for a total of 7 days at 37 degrees C, 5% CO2. BAK released into HBSS (i.e., the extract) was recovered from the vials and used as the test chemical in the SFPA (epithelium integrity), MTT assay (cellular viability), and the bovine lens assay with CLSM (mitochondrial metabolism and optical properties). The amount of BAK extracted from the various contact lenses was measured using an Abbe refractometer. Negative controls consisted of HBSS and contact lenses subjected to the same conditions as the treated contact lenses, but without BAK. RESULTS: Extracts obtained from soaking Focus Monthly lenses in BAK caused the most damage to the epithelium and mitochondrial metabolism. However, at 0.1% BAK extraction, all lens extracts showed increased levels of back vertex distance variability of the cultured bovine lens. CONCLUSIONS: Unexpectedly, lenses extracted with HBSS showed SFPA and MTT assay responses and an observed effect on the bovine lens epithelium visualized by CLSM, indicating that unknown chemical agents may be leached from contact lens polymers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".