MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126271425

Corneal epithelial cell biocompatibility to silicone hydrogel and conventional hydrogel contact lens packaging solutions.

2010· article· en· W2126271425 on OpenAlexaff
Maud Gorbet, N C Tanti, Lyndon Jones, Heather Sheardown

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViability assayBiocompatibilityContact lensSelf-healing hydrogelsChemistryCell adhesionAdhesionIn vitroBiophysicsSiliconeIncubationMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringCellBiochemistryPolymer chemistryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Although all contact lenses (CLs) are applied initially to the eye directly from a packaging solution, little is known about the effects of these solutions on human corneal epithelial cells (HCECs). Due to the porous nature of CL materials, they have the potential to sorb components of the packaging solution during storage, which could then be subsequently released upon insertion of the CL on the eye. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of various packaging solutions on HCECs, using an in vitro model. METHODS: An in vitro assay was developed whereby various silicone hydrogels and conventional, poly-2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (polyHEMA)-based lens materials were removed directly from their packaging and then incubated for up to 24 h with HCECs. The effect of the retained and released packaging solution components on HCECs was assessed by measuring cell viability, adhesion phenotype, and apoptosis. RESULTS: Incubation of HCECs with CLs stored in borate-buffered packaging solutions resulted in a significant reduction in cell viability. Adherent cells incubated with these CLs also exhibited reduced levels of beta(1) and alpha(3) integrin. Soaking borate-buffered packaged CLs in PBS before cell incubation resolved viability and integrin expression in all cases, with the exception of galyfilcon A and balafilcon A, from which a 20% reduction in cell viability was still observed. In comparison, CLs stored in phosphate-buffered packaging solutions had cellular viability and expression of integrins similar to control cells (cells incubated in the absence of a lens). When incubated with cells at a 10% concentration in serum-free medium, borate-buffered packaging solutions and borate-containing saline (Unisol 4) significantly reduced cell viability and integrin expression. Neither caspase activation nor annexin V binding was observed on cells following exposure to borate buffer solution. However, a significant decrease in reactive oxygen species was observed at 24 h. These latter results suggest that in vitro exposure to low concentration of borate/boric acid results in cell dysfunction, leading to necrosis rather than apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS: Borate-buffered packaging solutions were shown to adversely affect the viability and integrin expression of HCECs in vitro. When used in ophthalmic packaging solutions, the antimicrobial properties of borate buffer may be outweighed by its relatively cytotoxic effects on cells.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207