Topical immunomodulators in the management of allergic eye diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Allergic eye diseases comprise a spectrum of diseases, with each condition being characterized by a complex immunopathology. The more severe and chronic conditions, such as vernal keratoconjunctivitis and atopic keratoconjunctivitis, involve predominantly mast cells and eosinophils, while also being associated with a preponderance of T cells. Treatment with topical antihistamines or mast cell stabilizers is often unsatisfactory, and therapy depends on topical corticosteroids. Corticosteroids have significant side-effects with long-term use; therefore, they appear to be more appropriate for short-term pulse therapy. Immunomodulatory agents can also be used to inhibit T-cell activation and show encouraging results among patients with severe allergic eye conditions. The present review is an attempt to present a coherent picture of the recent investigations of topical immunomodulatory agents' therapy in severe allergic eye diseases, especially cyclosporine A and tacrolimus, and their mechanisms of action. RECENT FINDINGS: Immunomodulatory agents are commonly indicated for the treatment of severe and prolonged allergic conjunctivitis. This article reviews the recent studies of these drugs and the development of immunomodulatory treatments for severe allergic eye diseases. SUMMARY: Cyclosporine A and tacrolimus are currently available for the treatment of severe allergic conjunctivitis. These agents have led to improved therapeutic results for patients with severe and chronic allergic eye diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".