Upregulation of PCED1B-AS1 in proliferative diabetic retinopathy and its involvement in retinal vascular endothelial cell proliferation.

BACKGROUND: This study was to assess the diagnostic value of PCED1B-AS1 for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and investigate the involvement of PCED1B-AS1 in PDR. METHODS: The vitreous and blood specimens from 37 subjects with PDR and 21 non-diabetics were examined by reverse transcription quantitative PCR to determine the PCED1B-AS1 level. The two groups were age- and gender-matched. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to visually illustrate the diagnostic ability of PCED1B-AS1. Human retinal Müller glial cells were studied by ELISA. Proliferation and migration of human retinal microvascular endothelial cells (HRMECs) were assessed in vitro. RESULTS: Significant increases of PCED1B-AS1 levels were observed in the vitreous samples and CD34 + VEGFR-2 + cells from blood samples of diabetic subjects with PDR, compared with those of non-diabetics. The ROC curve based on the vitreous PCED1B-AS1 levels revealed an AUC of 0.812, while the ROC curve based on the PCED1B-AS1 levels in CD34 + VEGFR-2 + cells from blood samples revealed an AUC of 0.870. In Müller cell cultures, PCED1B-AS1 siRNA significantly attenuated VEGF and MCP-1 upregulation which were induced by CoCl2 and TNF-α. Additionally, PCED1B-AS1 siRNA attenuated VEGF-induced proliferation and migration in HRMECs. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the potential of PCED1B-AS1 as a diagnostic biomarker for PDR. In vitro data point to the anti-angiogenic and anti-proliferation effects of PCED1B-AS1.

First Human Results With the 256 Channel Intelligent Micro Implant Eye (IMIE 256).

Purpose: To report on the safety and efficacy of the 256-channel Intelligent Micro Implant Eye epiretinal prosthesis system (IMIE 256). Methods: The IMIE 256 implants were implanted in the right eyes of five subjects with end-stage retinitis pigmentosa. Following implantation, the subjects underwent visual rehabilitation training for 90 days, and their visual performance was evaluated using the grating visual acuity test, Tumbling E visual acuity test, direction of motion, square localization, and orientation and mobility test. To evaluate the safety of the IMIE 256, all adverse events were recorded. Results: Subjects performed significantly better on all evaluations with the IMIE 256 system on as compared with the performance at baseline or with the system off. There was a steady improvement in performance at each observation interval, indicating that the training and/or practice helped the subjects use the IMIE 256. There were two serious adverse events-electrode array movement and low intraocular pressure in one subject, which resolved with surgery. There were no other adverse events observed except those expected in the course of postoperative healing. Conclusions: These results show an improved safety and efficacy profile compared with that of the Argus II implant. Further clinical trials are needed to confirm these results in a larger number of subjects and over longer durations. Translational Relevance: To our knowledge, this study reports the first in-human data from a high-density (256 electrodes) epiretinal implant to restore sight to a subset of blind patients.