MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401105840 · doi:10.3390/ph17081007

What’s New in Ocular Drug Delivery: Advances in Suprachoroidal Injection since 2023

2024· review· en· W4401105840 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Y. Wu, Angel Gao, Michel Giunta, Simon D. Tran

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceuticals · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMacular degenerationChoroidOphthalmologyMacular edemaDrug deliveryPosterior segment of eyeballTriamcinolone acetonideGlaucomaDiabetic retinopathyPharmacologyRetinaDiabetes mellitusRetinalNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite significant advancements in ocular drug delivery, challenges persist in treating posterior segment diseases like macular edema (ME) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Suprachoroidal (SC) injections are a promising new method for targeted drug delivery to the posterior segment of the eye, providing direct access to the choroid and retina while minimizing systemic exposure and side effects. This review examines the anatomical and physiological foundations of the SC space; evaluates delivery devices such as microcatheters, hypodermic needles, and microneedles; and discusses pharmacokinetic principles. Additionally, advancements in gene delivery through SC injections are explored, emphasizing their potential to transform ocular disease management. This review also highlights clinical applications in treating macular edema, diabetic macular edema, age-related macular degeneration, choroidal melanoma, and glaucoma. Overall, SC injections are emerging as a promising novel route for administering ophthalmic treatments, with high bioavailability, reduced systemic exposure, and favorable safety profiles. Key therapeutic agents such as triamcinolone acetonide, dexamethasone, AAV-based gene therapy, and axitinib have shown promise. The field of suprachoroidal injection is progressing rapidly, and this review article, while attempting to encapsulate most of the published preclinical and clinical studies, mainly focuses on those that are published within 2023 and 2024.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceuticalsSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207