Randomized controlled trial on the efficacy and safety of autologous serum eye drops in dry eye syndrome

BACKGROUND Autologous serum eye drops(ASEDs),a novel treatment derived from blood serum,have emerged as a groundbreaking solution for managing dry eye syndrome(DES).These drops have shown significant promise in relieving the distressing symptoms of DES.This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of ASEDs compared to traditional treatments,which often prove inadequate or result in unwanted side effects,particularly in individuals with moderate-to-severe DES.AIM To evaluate whether ASEDs are safer and more effective than conventional artificial tears in the treatment of moderate-to-severe DES.METHODS This multi-centered randomized controlled trial included 240 patients with moderate-to-severe DES from three ophthalmology clinics in China.They were randomly assigned to receive either ASEDs or artificial tears for 12 wk.The primary outcome was the change in the ocular surface disease index(OSDI)score,with secondary outcomes including tear break-up time(TBUT),Schirmer I test,corneal fluorescein staining(CFS),and conjunctival impression cytology(CIC).Statistics analysis was performed using an analysis of covariance with adjustments made for baseline values.RESULTS Our findings revealed that both ASEDs and artificial tears significantly improved the OSDI score,TBUT,Schirmer I test,CFS,and CIC from baseline to week 12.The ASEDs group showed significantly greater improvement in all these measures than the artificial tears group(all P values<0.05).The average difference in the OSDI score between the two cohorts was-10.3(95%confidence interval:-13.6 to-7.0),indicating a substantial improvement in the ASEDs group.The occurrence of adverse events was comparable between cohorts,with no reports of severe adverse events.CONCLUSION ASEDs are more effective and safer than artificial tears for mitigating symptoms of moderate-to-severe DES.ASEDs could be an alternative/supplementary therapy for patients with DES less responsive to traditional treatments.

Effect of human autologous serum and fetal bovine serum on human corneal epithelial cell viability,migration and proliferation in vitro

AIM： To analyze the concentration-dependent effects of autologous serum （AS） and fetal bovine serum （FBS） on human corneal epithelial cell （HCEC） viability, migration and proliferation. METHODS： AS was prepared from 13 patients with non- healing epithelial defects Dulbecco＇s modified eagle medium/ Ham＇s F12 （DMEM/F12） with 5% FBS, 0.5% dimethyl sulphoxide （DMSO）, 10 ng/mL human epidermal growth factor, 1% insulin-transferrin-selenium, then were incubated in serum media： DMEM/F12 supplemented by 5%, 10%, 15% or 30% AS or FBS. HCEC viability was analyzed using cell proliferation kit XTI＇, migration using a wound healing assay, proliferation by the cell proliferation enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay （ELISA） BrdU kit. Statistical analysis was performed using the generalized linear model, the values at 30% AS or 30% FBS were used as the baselines. RESULTS： HCEC viability was the highest at 30% AS or 15% FBS and the lowest at 10% AS or 30% FBS application. HCEC migration was the quickest through 30% AS or 30% FBS and the slowest through 5% AS or 5% FBS concentrations. Proliferation was the most increased through 15% AS or 5% FBS and the least increased through 30% AS or 30% FBS concentrations. HCEC viability at 10% and 15% AS was significantly worse （P=0.001, P=0.023） compared to baseline and significantly better at 15% FBS （P=0.003） concentrations. HCEC migration was significantly worse （P〈0.007） and HCEC proliferation significantly better （P〈0.001） in all concentration groups compared to baseline. CONCLUSION： For the best viability of HCEC 30% AS or 15% FBS, for HCEC migration 30% AS or 30% FBS, for proliferation 15% AS or 5% FBS should be used. Therefore, we suggest the use of 30% AS in clinical practice.

Autologous peripheral blood-derived orthobiologics:Different types and their effectiveness in managing knee osteoarthritis

Knees are the most commonly impacted weight-bearing joints in osteoarthritis(OA),affecting millions of people worldwide.With increasing life spans and obesity rates,the incidence of knee OA will further increase,leading to a significant increase in the economic burden.Conventional treatment modalities utilized to manage knee OA have limitations.Over the last decade,the role of various autologous peripheral blood-derived orthobiologics(APBOs)for the treatment of knee OA has been extensively investigated.This editorial provided an overview and focused on defining and shedding light on the current state of evidence based on the most recent published clinical studies concerning the use of APBO for the management of knee OA.While numerous studies have demonstrated promising results for these preparations,a notable gap exists in the comparative analysis of these diverse formulations.This absence of head-to-head studies poses a considerable challenge for physicians/surgeons in determining the optimal preparation for managing knee OA and achieving sustained longterm results.Thus,more adequately powered,multicenter,prospective,doubleblind,randomized controlled trials with longer follow-ups are needed to establish the long-term efficacy and to aid physicians/surgeons in determining the optimal APBO for the management of knee OA.