Subretinal implantation of a monolayer of human embryonic stem cell-derived retinal pigment epithelium: a feasibility and safety study in Yucatán minipigs.

PURPOSE: A subretinal implant termed CPCB-RPE1 is currently being developed to surgically replace dystrophic RPE in patients with dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and severe vision loss. CPCB-RPE1 is composed of a terminally differentiated, polarized human embryonic stem cell-derived RPE (hESC-RPE) monolayer pre-grown on a biocompatible, mesh-supported submicron parylene C membrane. The objective of the present delivery study was to assess the feasibility and 1-month safety of CPCB-RPE1 implantation in Yucatán minipigs, whose eyes are similar to human eyes in size and gross retinal anatomy. METHODS: This was a prospective, partially blinded, randomized study in 14 normal-sighted female Yucatán minipigs (aged 2 months, weighing 24-35 kg). Surgeons were blinded to the randomization codes and postoperative and post-mortem assessments were performed in a blinded manner. Eleven minipigs received CPCB-RPE1 while three control minipigs underwent sham surgery that generated subretinal blebs. All animals except two sham controls received combined local (Ozurdex™ dexamethasone intravitreal implant) and systemic (tacrolimus) immunosuppression or local immunosuppression alone. Correct placement of the CPCB-RPE1 implant was assessed by in vivo optical coherence tomography and post-mortem histology. hESC-RPE cells were identified using immunohistochemistry staining for TRA-1-85 (a human marker) and RPE65 (an RPE marker). As the study results of primary interest were nonnumerical no statistical analysis or tests were conducted. RESULTS: CPCB-RPE1 implants were reliably placed, without implant breakage, in the subretinal space of the minipig eye using surgical techniques similar to those that would be used in humans. Histologically, hESC-RPE cells were found to survive as an intact monolayer for 1 month based on immunohistochemistry staining for TRA-1-85 and RPE65. CONCLUSIONS: Although inconclusive regarding the necessity or benefit of systemic or local immunosuppression, our study demonstrates the feasibility and safety of CPCB-RPE1 subretinal implantation in a comparable animal model and provides an encouraging starting point for human studies.

Profile of ocriplasmin and its potential in the treatment of vitreomacular adhesion.

The recent approval by the US Food and Drug Administration of ocriplasmin for the treatment of symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion (VMA), often associated with vitreomacular traction (VMT) and macular hole (MH), has brought new attention to the field of pharmacologic vitreolysis. The need for an enzyme to split the vitreomacular interface, which is formed by a strong adhesive interaction between the posterior vitreous cortex and the internal limiting membrane, historically stems from pediatric eye surgery. This review summarizes the different anatomic classifications of posterior vitreous detachment or anomalous posterior vitreous detachment and puts these in the context of clinical pathologies commonly observed in clinical practice of the vitreoretinal specialist, such as MH, VMT, age-related macular degeneration, and diabetic macular edema. We revisit the outcome of the Phase II studies that indicated ocriplasmin was a safe and effective treatment for selected cases of symptomatic VMA and MH. Release of VMA at day 28 was achieved by 26.5% of patients in the ocriplasmin group versus 10.1% in the placebo group (P<0.001). Interestingly, for MHs, the numbers were more remarkable. Predictive factors for successful ocriplasmin treatment were identified for VMT (VMA diameter smaller than 1,500 µm) and MH (smaller than 250 µm). In comparison with the highly predictable outcome after vitrectomy, the general success rate of ocriplasmin not under clinical trial conditions has not fully met expectations and needs to be proven in real-world clinical settings. The ocriplasmin data will be compared in the future with observational data on spontaneous VMA release, will help retina specialists make more accurate predictions, and will improve outcome rates.

Comparison of cytokine levels from undiluted vitreous of untreated patients with retinal vein occlusion.

PURPOSE: To compare cytokines in undiluted vitreous of treatment-naïve patients with macular oedema without vitreomacular traction secondary to branch (BRVO), central (CRVO) and hemi-central (H-CRVO) retinal vein occlusion. METHODS: Ninety-four patients (median age 72 years, 42 men) underwent an intravitreal combination therapy, including a single-site 23-gauge core vitrectomy and the application of bevacizumab and dexamethasone due to vision-decreasing macular oedema. Among these were 43 patients with BRVO, 35 with CRVO and 16 patients with hemi-CRVO, which were distributed in a fresh or old retinal vein occlusion type (seven or more months after onset). Undiluted vitreous samples were analysed for interleukin 6 (IL-6), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A) with cytometric BEAD assay. Vitreous samples from patients with idiopathic epiretinal membrane served as controls (n = 14). RESULTS: The mean cytokine values were highest in the CRVO group with IL-6 = 64.7 pg/ml (SD ± 115.8), MCP-1 = 1015.8 pg/ml (±970.1) and VEGF-A = 278.4 pg/ml (±512.8), followed by the H-CRVO group with IL-6 = 59.9 pg/ml (SD ± 97.5), MCP-1 = 938.8 pg/ml (±561.1) and VEGF-A = 211.5 pg/ml (±232.4). The BRVO group had IL-6 = 23.2 pg/ml (SD ± 48.8), MCP-1 = 602.6 g/ml (±490.3) and VEGF-A = 161.8 pg/ml (±314.4). The values of MCP-1 and VEGF-A were significantly different for CRVO or H-CRVO versus BRVO. All values were significantly higher than in the control samples, which had 6.2 ± 3.4 pg/ml (IL-6), 253 ± 74 pg/ml (MCP-1) and 7 ± 4.9 pg/ml (VEGF-A). Within the old RVO type, only MCP-1 was significantly different for CRVO or H-CRVO versus BRVO. CONCLUSIONS: Both inflammatory markers and VEGF-A were higher in CRVO and H-CRVO than in BRVO undiluted vitreous samples. It seems that monocyte recruitment to the vessel wall, which might underlie the importance of eosinophils in tissue remodelling after RVO, is of special interest owing to the significant difference in MCP-1 in the older RVO types.