Uptake and Release of a Multipurpose Solution Biocide (MAP-D) From Hydrogel and Silicone Hydrogel Contact Lenses Using a Radiolabel Methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the uptake and release of radiolabelled myristamidopropyl dimethylamine (MAP-D) on reusable daily wear contact lenses (CLs) over 7 days. METHODS: Three silicone hydrogel (SH) CL materials (lotrafilcon B, balafilcon A, senofilcon A) and two conventional hydrogel (CH) materials (etafilcon A, omafilcon A) were tested. A short-term (experiment 1, N=4) and a longer-term (experiment 2, N=3) study was conducted. In experiment 1, the CLs were incubated in 2 mL of phosphate buffered solution (PBS) containing 14C MAP-D (5 μg/mL) for 8 hrs. The release of 14C MAP-D was measured at t=0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 hr in PBS. In experiment 2, the CLs were incubated in the 14C MAP-D solution for 8 hrs followed by a 16-hr release in PBS. This cycle was repeated daily for 7 days. At the end of both experiments, lenses were extracted to determine the total uptake of MAP-D. The radioactivity was measured using a beta scintillation counter. RESULTS: In experiment 1, all three SH lenses sorbed similar amounts of MAP-D (P=0.99), all of which were higher than the two CH materials (P<0.01). However, the CH materials released a greater amount of MAP-D than the SH materials (P<0.01). In experiment 2, the uptake of MAP-D in SH materials increased over 7 days, whereas the amount of MAP-D remained constant in the CH materials (P=0.99). Similar to experiment 1, the CH lenses released more MAP-D than SH lenses after 7 days (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The SH materials absorbed greater amounts of MAP-D compared to CH materials. However, the CH materials released the greatest amount of MAP-D. Radioactive labelling of MAP-D offers a highly sensitive method of assessing the uptake and release profiles of biocides to CL materials.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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".