Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers and Imaging Retina

Experimental Science 

Serum Inflammatory Markers After Rupture Retinal Laser Injury in Mice

Yannis M. Paulus, MD; Chuan-Hui Kuo, PhD; Kei Morohoshi, MD, PhD; Alex Nugent, MD; Luo Luo Zheng, AB; Hiroyuki Nomoto, MD, PhD; Mark S. Blumenkranz, MD; Daniel Palanker, PhD; Santa J. Ono, PhD

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:

To characterize the cellular, immunological, and inflammatory response to retinal photocoagulation of intense rupture laser lesions as a model of retinal degenerative diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Seven C57BL/6 mice were irradiated using a 532-nm laser to induce 10 retinal burns per eye that ruptured Bruch’s membrane. Blood was drawn from the saphenous vein before and 2 months after laser treatment. The serum was run on antigen microarrays with 85 molecular markers associated with retinal degenerative diseases.

RESULTS:

Rupture laser resulted in dramatic changes in the immunoglobulin reactivity of most inflammatory markers 2 months after laser injury. Approximately two-thirds increased expression and one-third decreased expression. Notable markers that were increased included complement C3, CRP, PKM2, and aldolase.

CONCLUSION:

Rupture laser injury causes a change in the serum inflammatory markers after 2 months similar to macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and cancer-associated retinopathy. This animal model could be used as a biomarker for disease stage and activity in retinal degenerations.

[Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2015;46:362–368.]

From the Department of Ophthalmology, Stanford University, Stanford, California (YMP, AN, LZ, HN, MSB, DP); the Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (CHK, SJO); and the Department of Ophthalmology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University and Tamahokubu Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan (KM).

Supported in part by the Heed Ophthalmic Foundation Fellows Grant, Alcon Research Institute grant, the Horngren and Miller Family Foundations, and the Angelos and Penelope Dellaporta Research Fund.

Drs. Blumenkranz and Palanker are parties to a Stanford University patent on patterned scanning laser photocoagulation licensed to Topcon Corporation with an associated equity and royalty interest. Dr. Palanker is a consultant for Topcon. The remaining authors report no relevant financial disclosures.

Address correspondence to Yannis M. Paulus, MD, Stanford University Department of Ophthalmology, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford, 2452 Watson Court, Stanford, CA 94303; email: yannis.paulus@gmail.com.

Received: April 13, 2014
Accepted: December 12, 2014
Posted Online: June 07, 2014

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:

To characterize the cellular, immunological, and inflammatory response to retinal photocoagulation of intense rupture laser lesions as a model of retinal degenerative diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Seven C57BL/6 mice were irradiated using a 532-nm laser to induce 10 retinal burns per eye that ruptured Bruch’s membrane. Blood was drawn from the saphenous vein before and 2 months after laser treatment. The serum was run on antigen microarrays with 85 molecular markers associated with retinal degenerative diseases.

RESULTS:

Rupture laser resulted in dramatic changes in the immunoglobulin reactivity of most inflammatory markers 2 months after laser injury. Approximately two-thirds increased expression and one-third decreased expression. Notable markers that were increased included complement C3, CRP, PKM2, and aldolase.

CONCLUSION:

Rupture laser injury causes a change in the serum inflammatory markers after 2 months similar to macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and cancer-associated retinopathy. This animal model could be used as a biomarker for disease stage and activity in retinal degenerations.

[Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2015;46:362–368.]

From the Department of Ophthalmology, Stanford University, Stanford, California (YMP, AN, LZ, HN, MSB, DP); the Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (CHK, SJO); and the Department of Ophthalmology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University and Tamahokubu Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan (KM).

Supported in part by the Heed Ophthalmic Foundation Fellows Grant, Alcon Research Institute grant, the Horngren and Miller Family Foundations, and the Angelos and Penelope Dellaporta Research Fund.

Drs. Blumenkranz and Palanker are parties to a Stanford University patent on patterned scanning laser photocoagulation licensed to Topcon Corporation with an associated equity and royalty interest. Dr. Palanker is a consultant for Topcon. The remaining authors report no relevant financial disclosures.

Address correspondence to Yannis M. Paulus, MD, Stanford University Department of Ophthalmology, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford, 2452 Watson Court, Stanford, CA 94303; email: yannis.paulus@gmail.com.

Received: April 13, 2014
Accepted: December 12, 2014
Posted Online: June 07, 2014

Introduction

Retinal laser photocoagulation was first described 50 years ago and remains the standard of care for many retinal diseases, including extrafoveal choroidal neovascularization, retinal tears, diabetic retinopathy, and retinal vein occlusions.1 Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative retinopathies involves the purposeful destruction of a significant fraction of the outer retina including photoreceptors.2 The exact mechanism by which laser therapy achieves its therapeutic end point is an area of active investigation. Several mechanisms have been proposed to underlie the efficacy of retinal laser therapy, including improved retinal oxygenation, reduction in metabolic activity through destruction of photoreceptors, inhibition of angiogenic stimulators, increased production of angio-inhibitory factors, and reduction in oxidative stress.3–6 Selective retinal therapy using microsecond pulses to selectively destroy RPE by vaporization of melanosomes while sparing the photoreceptors induces RPE proliferation and migration.7,8

Subvisible and sublethal laser therapy has also been shown to result in a constellation of molecular changes in cells, including upregulation of heat shock protein (hsp)-70 and other inflammatory markers locally.9–11 Photocoagulation creates a surge in free radicals.6,12 Matrix metalloproteinases (MMP-9 and alpha-2-macroglobulin)5 and transforming growth factor beta 2 increase dramatically after PRP.3 Angiostatin, vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), and fibroblasts are thought to influence the therapeutic effects of PRP.4,13 The retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) modulates local cytokines, including VEGF, pigment epithelial-derived factor (PEDF), MMP, and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases (TIMP). Rat models of hypoxia have shown that photoreceptors are a repository of pro-angiogenic growth factors (such as VEGF, nitric oxide synthases, HIF-1, and insulin-like growth factor-1), which have been generated in other cells in hypoxic conditions. Thus, destruction of photoreceptors could reduce the pro-angiogenic growth factors by reducing this repository.14

A similar inflammatory cascade has been implicated in numerous degenerative ocular conditions, including age-related macular degeneration (AMD). AMD is the leading cause of irreversible blindness in adults older than 65 years in the developed world, affecting more than 1.75 million Americans, and is expected to increase by 54% in the next 15 years.15 The role of single nucleotide polymorphisms and inflammation in AMD has been well-reviewed.16 Complement factor H is strongly associated with AMD.17 Serum antiglial fibrillary acidic protein and carboxyethylpyrrole antibodies are elevated in patients with AMD.18,19 Alpha-enolase, a glycolytic enzyme, has been documented in patients with wet AMD and cancer-associated retinopathy.20,21 Pyruvate kinase M2 (PKM2) has been shown to be targeted in both dry and wet AMD, and higher levels of anti-PKM2 antibody are noted in wet AMD compared with dry AMD.22

The eye is an immune-privileged site, and thus sympathetic ophthalmia can develop after penetrating ocular injury or, rarely, laser treatment.23 Intense laser burns, particularly those that rupture Bruch’s membrane, disrupt this immune privilege and expose the eye to the systemic circulation and immune system. Rupture of Bruch’s membrane by laser remains the most established animal model of choroidal neovascularization for AMD.24 This study seeks to characterize the cellular, immunological, and inflammatory response to rupture laser lesions as a model of retinal degenerative diseases by assessing the changes in serum inflammatory markers using a microarray chip consisting of antigens from a proteomic analysis of constituents of drusen, retina, and choroidal membranes.

Materials and Methods

Retinal Laser Application

Seven C57BL/6 mice (8 weeks old) were used in accordance with the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Statement Regarding the Use of Animals in Ophthalmic and Vision Research, after approval from the Stanford University animal institutional review board. The mice were anesthetized using ketamine hydrochloride (80 mg/kg, intraperitoneal) and xylazine (16 mg/kg, intraperitoneal) administered 5 minutes before the procedure. Pupillary dilation was achieved by one drop each of 1% tropicamide and 2.5% phenylephrine hydrochloride. Topical tetracaine 0.5% was instilled in the treated eye prior to treatment. Goniosol, or hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, was then placed over each eye as a contact solution and a glass cover slip gently placed over the goniosol to visualize the retina. The non-treated eye was covered with goniosol and taped to prevent corneal exposure keratopathy.

The genetic background of T lymphocytes influences the development of the T helper phenotype. The susceptibility or resistance of different mouse strains to infection and immunity is influenced by differential induction of Th1 and Th2-type responses. C57BL/6 and BALB/c mice display opposite T-cell subset polarizations. BALB/c mice produce a Th2 response to antigens, whereas C57BL/6 mice are Th1 response slanted. Th1-induced ocular inflammation demonstrates more chemokines and their receptor transcripts than Th2-induced disease.25 In experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis (EAU), the inflammatory mediator expression is similar to Th1-induced disease. Susceptible strains of mice immunized for induction of EAU with the uveitogenic protein inter-photoreceptor retinoid-binding protein demonstrate type 1 response during the time of symptoms.26 Autoimmunity to a pathogenic retinal antigen begins as a balanced cytokine response that polarizes toward type 1 in a disease-susceptible genotype and toward type 2 in a disease-resistant genotype. We are interested in studying inflammation and autoimmunity, so Th1-susceptible C57BL/6 mice were selected for use in this study.

The PASCAL laser system (Topcon, Tokyo, Japan) was used to perform 532-nm laser radiation. A rupture was assumed to occur if small bubbles with or without hemorrhage appeared at the lesion site. Seven C57BL/6 mice (8 weeks old) were irradiated using the PASCAL laser with beam diameter of 60 µm, power of 400 mW, and pulse duration of 50 ms to induce numerous laser burns that ruptured Bruch’s membrane. Ten laser burns were placed in the peripapillary region of each retina. After the laser, topical bacitracin/polymyxin 500/10,000 ophthalmic ointment was instilled in both eyes. At the completion of all experiments, the animals were euthanized with inhaled carbon dioxide, confirmed by cervical dislocation. While only some animals develop choroidal neovascularization after Bruch’s membrane rupture (60% within 2 weeks in the initial study describing this technique),27 all animals have a damaged blood-retina barrier, and thus the immune-privileged retina is exposed to the systemic immune system.

Blood Collection

Blood was drawn from the saphenous mouse vein prior to and 2 months after laser treatment as described previously.28 The time point of 2 months was selected due to a previous rabbit laser model noting stable gliosis after 2 months, suggesting that the inflammatory and remodeling pathway resulting from laser injury had likely concluded by this time.29

For 10 minutes, EMLA or lidocaine-based cream was applied on the skin at the site of the venipuncture before collection. A heat lamp was used to induce vasodilation. Mice were encouraged to enter a perforated 50-mL centrifuge tube while the tail was held. A hind leg was extended, and the tarsal area of the hind leg shaved. Mild pressure was applied above the knee to occlude the saphenous vein. A 27-gauge needle and a capillary pipette flushed with EDTA was used to acquire 50 mL of blood. Manual pressure was then applied for hemostasis.

The whole blood was placed in a 1.5 mL Eppendorf tube and incubated at room temperature for 30 minutes. It was then centrifuged for 10 minutes in a Minispin centrifuge (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany) at 669 RCF or 3200 rpm for 10 minutes. The serum was then transferred to another Eppendorf tube using pipettes and stored at −80°C.

Antigen Microarray Analysis

The serum was run on an antigen microarray chip (Whatman Schleicher & Schleicher BioScience, Keene, NH) with 85 molecules associated with AMD and other retinal diseases, as described previously.30,31 The antigens were selected from proteomics analyses of constituents of drusen, retina, and choroidal membranes after performing western blot and mass spectrometer analysis of animals models of AMD. The antigen array was designed as described previously for systemic autoimmune diseases and included 18 intraocular autoantigens that are constituents of drusen and extracellular matrix. Collagen III, collagen IV, elastin, fibronectin, and histone H2B have been shown to be significantly elevated in the sera of patients with AMD compared to healthy controls30 and were included in our study.

Antigens printed on a slide are then incubated with the serum, and the inflammatory markers binding to the antigens (Cy3 labeled anti-immunoglobulin G) were detected using Genepix 4000B scanner (Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). The optimal printing concentration for all antigens was determined to be 1 mg/mL, which was tested previously and proved efficient for antibody binding. Antigen microarrays have been a useful tool for antibody profiling to identify autoantigens of many autoimmune diseases, including systemic lupus erythematosus, Sjögren’s syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and autoimmune retinopathy.32

Each antigen was normalized to the average intensity of total immunoglobulin G printed on the array as an internal control to generate a normalized fluorescence reactivity intensity. Protein concentration was not standardized or measured between samples. The serum was tested at various dilutions, and then all samples were tested at the same dilution to achieve the best signal to give a normalized signal. Resulting two-dimensional images represent net fluorescence intensities minus background fluorescence. Heat maps of these fluorescent signals with clustering were generated using Cluster and TreeView software. Statistical analysis was performed in Microsoft Excel using a two-tailed, homoscedastic (two-sample equal variance) Student’s t test of the two data sets.

Results

Rupture of Bruch’s membrane by laser results in statistically significant changes in the immunoglobulin reactivity of a variety of inflammatory markers 2 months after laser injury (Figure 1). Expression of most inflammatory markers changed, with approximately two-thirds increasing and one-third decreasing the expression. A variety of inflammatory markers were increased to some degree after laser injury, including the following: complement C3, C-reactive protein (CRP), PKM2, calreticulin, collagen V, Helicobacter pylori, collagen VI, complement factor B, haptoglobin, ceruloplasmin, beta2-microglobulin, factor X, superoxide dismutase 1, aldolase, annexin V, cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase, annexin II, creatine kinase BB, apolipoprotein B, retinol binding protein, transferin, L-glutamine synthetase, recoverin, and calmodulin (Figure 2). All of the changes in Figure 2 were statistically significant (P < .05) using a two-tailed Student’s t test.

Heat map of immunoglobulin G (IgG) reactivity after laser application. The average signal intensity of each antigen in each sample was normalized to the average intensity of total IgG printed on the arrays as an internal control. The normalized fluorescence intensity was used to generate the heat map. The reactivity intensities of each antigen are shown on a relative scale. Green, black, and red represent net fluorescence intensities below, equal to, and above the mean, respectively. This map demonstrates a distinctive pattern of IgG inflammatory markers 2 months after laser injury.

Figure 1.

Heat map of immunoglobulin G (IgG) reactivity after laser application. The average signal intensity of each antigen in each sample was normalized to the average intensity of total IgG printed on the arrays as an internal control. The normalized fluorescence intensity was used to generate the heat map. The reactivity intensities of each antigen are shown on a relative scale. Green, black, and red represent net fluorescence intensities below, equal to, and above the mean, respectively. This map demonstrates a distinctive pattern of IgG inflammatory markers 2 months after laser injury.

Average of relative signal intensities for immunoglobulin G inflammatory markers before and after laser application. Significance analysis of the microarray signals identified inflammatory markers with significant (P < .05) change in expression after laser injury, compared to control before laser application. Approximately two-thirds of the antigens increased expression and one-third decreased expression after laser. These include many inflammatory markers notable for their role in retinal degenerations. nfi = normalized fluorescence intensity.

Figure 2.

Average of relative signal intensities for immunoglobulin G inflammatory markers before and after laser application. Significance analysis of the microarray signals identified inflammatory markers with significant (P < .05) change in expression after laser injury, compared to control before laser application. Approximately two-thirds of the antigens increased expression and one-third decreased expression after laser. These include many inflammatory markers notable for their role in retinal degenerations. nfi = normalized fluorescence intensity.

The 24 notable inflammatory marker levels that significantly increased after rupture laser are summarized in the Table, showing the average pre- and post-laser levels, standard deviations, and P values. Complement C3 increased from 1004 nfi (normalized fluorescence intensity) before laser to 3655 nfi after laser (P = 1.5 *10−6). Mouse knockout models lacking the complement component C3 and the receptors for complement activation fragments C3a (C3aR) and C5a (C5aR) have been shown to result in caspase-3 upregulation, early retinal degeneration, and retinal dysfunction to light.33 CRP increased from 467 nfi before laser to 2,030 nfi after laser (P = .00048). CRP has been shown to be significantly higher in immunohistochemistry samples of patients with AMD at the retina/choroid interface.34 CRP is a nonspecific systemic inflammatory marker that can activate the classic complement pathway through C1q, thus playing an important pro-inflammatory role.

Aldolase increases from 111 nfi before laser to 281 nfi after laser (P = 8.11 *10−5). Aldolase has been found to be elevated in patients with diabetic retinopathy but not in patients with diabetes without diabetic retinopathy.35 Aldolase C is an enzyme associated with sugar metabolism whose expression is limited to the central nerve system, including brain and retina. Therefore its expression may be used as a marker for the breakdown of retinal blood barrier.

PKM2 is increased from 451 nfi before laser to 1,018 nfi after laser (P = .0021) and L-glutamine synthetase is increased from 3.4 nfi before laser to 23.7 nfi after laser (P = .015). Both of these antibodies are expressed in Alzheimer’s disease.36 Aldolase C and PKM2 were also found as inflammatory markers in rabbit serum with minimally visible and moderate (grade 2) laser lesions, although these were not found to be elevated previously in intense (grade 3) laser lesions.37

Several inflammatory markers were downregulated after rupture laser injury. One example is GAPDH (glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase), which is an enzyme in the glycolytic pathways that catalyzes production of 1,2 bisphosphoglycerate from glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate. Prior studies have shown that increased oxidative stress impairs energy metabolism and causes GAPDH down-regulation and redistribution (from soluble cytoplasmic to insoluble aggregates in nucleus).38 This indicates that the complex cellular reaction to injury downregulates some inflammatory markers due to the increased stress shifting cellular metabolism.

Discussion

Intense rupture burns that disrupt the blood retinal barrier and retinal immune privilege cause a statistically significant change in serum inflammatory markers after 2 months, including some retinal autoantibodies. Many of the affected inflammatory markers are identical to ones that have been implicated in AMD, diabetic retinopathy, Alzheimer’s, and retinal degenerations, including complement C3, CRP, aldolase, PKM2, and L-glutamine synthetase. Unexpectedly, the destruction of photoreceptors during irradiation resulted in the production of only one phototransduction-specific antibody, recoverin, which we are unable to explain at this time.

Neurodegenerative conditions are difficult to study in animal models because they are often slowly progressive, age-associated, and human-specific, thus necessitating the investigation of surrogate markers. The similarity of serum inflammatory markers in this animal model and neurodegenerative diseases can help to develop an improved model to monitor different stages of retinal degenerative conditions by checking the inflammatory marker levels in serum after rupture laser. Inflammatory markers may directly cause pathogenic retinal changes, or it could be a side effect of tissue damage, or autoantibody-induced pathogenesis may require previous tissue damage. This model of serum inflammatory marker formation through laser could be used as a surrogate end point to study the natural history of disease progression and clinical efficacy of pharmaceutical agents to treat retinal degenerations through analysis of the level of serum inflammatory marker levels. Additional natural history studies in humans correlating the expression of these antigens will be required to test the utility of this novel animal model of neurodegeneration using rupture laser burns, but our preliminary results suggest that this might be a potentially fruitful area for further investigation.

References

  1. Kapany NS, Peppers NA, Zweng HC, Flocks M. Retinal photocoagulation by lasers. Nature. 1963;199:146–149. doi:10.1038/199146a0 [CrossRef]
  2. Little HL, Zweng HC, Peabody RR. Argon laser slit-lamp retinal photocoagulation. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1970;74:85–97.
  3. Matsumoto M, Yoshimura N, Honda Y. Increased production of transforming growth factor-beta 2 from cultured human retinal pigment epithelial cells by photocoagulation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:4245–4252.
  4. Spranger J, Hammes HP, Preissner KT, Schatz H, Pfeiffer AF. Release of the angiogenesis inhibitor angiostatin in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy: association with retinal photocoagulation. Diabetologia. 2000;43:1404–1407. doi:10.1007/s001250051546 [CrossRef]
  5. Sanchez MC, Luna JD, Barcelona PF, et al. Effect of retinal laser photocoagulation on the activity of metalloproteinases and the alpha(2)-macroglobulin proteolytic state in the vitreous of eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Exp Eye Res. 2007;85:644–650. doi:10.1016/j.exer.2007.07.018 [CrossRef]
  6. Jennings PE, MacEwen CJ, Fallon TJ, Scott N, Haining WM, Belch JJ. Oxidative effects of laser photocoagulation. Free Radic Biol Med. 1991;11:327–330. doi:10.1016/0891-5849(91)90130-U [CrossRef]
  7. Brinkmann R, Roider J, Birngruber R. Selective retina therapy (SRT): a review on methods, techniques, preclinical and first clinical results. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol. 2006;302:51–69.
  8. Roider J. Laser treatment of retinal diseases by subthreshold laser effects. Semin Ophthalmol. 1999;14:19–26. doi:10.3109/08820539909056059 [CrossRef]
  9. Desmettre T, Maurage CA, Mordon S. Heat shock protein hyperexpression on chorioretinal layers after transpupillary thermotherapy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:2976–2980.
  10. Desmettre T, Maurage CA, Mordon S. Transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT) with short duration laser exposures induce heat shock protein (HSP) hyperexpression on choroidoretinal layers. Lasers Surg Med. 2003;33:102–107. doi:10.1002/lsm.10193 [CrossRef]
  11. Sramek C, Mackanos M, Spitler R, et al. Non-damaging retinal phototherapy: dynamic range of heat shock protein expression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:1780–1787. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-5917 [CrossRef]
  12. Caldwell RB, Bartoli M, Behzadian MA, et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor and diabetic retinopathy: role of oxidative stress. Curr Drug Targets. 2005;6:511–524. doi:10.2174/1389450054021981 [CrossRef]
  13. Zhang NL, Samadani EE, Frank RN. Mitogenesis and retinal pigment epithelial cell antigen expression in the rat after krypton laser photocoagulation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:2412–2424.
  14. Foulds WS, Kaur C, Luu CD, Kek WK. A role for photoreceptors in retinal oedema and angiogenesis: an additional explanation for laser treatment?Eye (Lond). 2010;24:918–926. doi:10.1038/eye.2009.173 [CrossRef]
  15. Klein R, Klein BE, Knudtson MD, Meuer SM, Swift M, Gangnon RE. Fifteen-year cumulative incidence of age-related macular degeneration: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:253–262. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.10.040 [CrossRef]
  16. Donoso LA, Kim D, Frost A, Callahan A, Hageman G. The role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of age-related macular degeneration. Surv Ophthalmol. 2006;51:137–152. doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2005.12.001 [CrossRef]
  17. Haines JL, Hauser MA, Schmidt S, et al. Complement factor H variant increases the risk of age-related macular degeneration. Science. 2005;308:419–421. doi:10.1126/science.1110359 [CrossRef]
  18. Penfold PL, Provis JM, Furby JH, Gatenby PA, Billson FA. Autoantibodies to retinal astrocytes associated with age-related macular degeneration. GraefesArch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1990;228:270–274. doi:10.1007/BF00920033 [CrossRef]
  19. Gu X, Meer SG, Miyagi M, et al. Carboxyethylpyrrole protein adducts and autoantibodies, biomarkers for age-related macular degeneration. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:42027–42035. doi:10.1074/jbc.M305460200 [CrossRef]
  20. Dot C, Guigay J, Adamus G. Anti-alpha-enolase antibodies in cancer-associated retinopathy with small cell carcinoma of the lung. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139:746–747. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2004.10.044 [CrossRef]
  21. Joachim SC, Bruns K, Lackner KJ, Pfeiffer N, Grus FH. Analysis of IgG antibody patterns against retinal antigens and antibodies to alpha-crystallin, GFAP, and alpha-enolase in sera of patients with “wet” age-related macular degeneration. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2007;245:619–626. doi:10.1007/s00417-006-0429-9 [CrossRef]
  22. Morohoshi K, Ohbayashi M, Patel N, Chong V, Bird AC, Ono SJ. Identification of anti-retinal antibodies in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Exp Mo Pathol. 2012;93:193–199. doi:10.1016/j.yexmp.2012.03.007 [CrossRef]
  23. Lam S, Tessler HH, Lam BL, Wilensky JT. High incidence of sympathetic ophthalmia after contact and noncontact neodymium:YAG cyclotherapy. Ophthalmology. 1992;99:1818–1822. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(92)31719-1 [CrossRef]
  24. Archer DB, Gardiner TA. Morphologic, fluorescein angiographic, and light microscopic features of experimental choroidal neovascularization. Am J Ophthalmology. 1981;91:297–311. doi:10.1016/0002-9394(81)90281-6 [CrossRef]
  25. Foxman EF, Zhang M, Hurst SD, et al. Inflammatory mediators in uveitis: differential induction of cytokines and chemokines in Th1- versus Th2-mediated ocular inflammation. J Immunol. 2002;168(5):2483–2492. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.168.5.2483 [CrossRef]
  26. Sun B, Sun SH, Chan CC, Wiggert B, Caspi RR. Autoimmunity to a pathogenic retinal antigen begins as a balanced cytokine response that polarizes towards type 1 in a disease-susceptible and towards type 2 in a disease-resistant genotype. Int Immunol. 1999;11(8):1307–1312. doi:10.1093/intimm/11.8.1307 [CrossRef]
  27. Dobi ET, Puliafito CA, Destro M. A new model of experimental choroidal neovascularization in the rat. Arch Ophthalmol. 1989;107:264–269. doi:10.1001/archopht.1989.01070010270035 [CrossRef]
  28. Abatan OI, Welch KB, Nemzek JA. Evaluation of Saphenous Venipuncture and Modified Tail-clip Blood Collection in Mice. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2008;47:8–15.
  29. Paulus YM, Jain A, Gariano RF, et al. Healing of retinal photocoagulation lesions. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:5540–5545. doi:10.1167/iovs.08-1928 [CrossRef]
  30. Morohoshi K, Patel N, Obhayashi M, et al. Serum autoantibody bio-markers for age-related macular degeneration and possible regulators of neovascularization. Exp Mol Pathol. 2011;92:64–73. doi:10.1016/j.yexmp.2011.09.017 [CrossRef]
  31. Patel N, Ohbayashi M, Nugent AK, et al. Circulating anti-retinal antibodies as immune markers in age-related macular degeneration. Immunology. 2005;115:422–430. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2005.02173.x [CrossRef]
  32. Mantel I, Ramchand KV, Holder GE, et al. Macular and retinal dysfunction of unknown origin in adults with normal fundi: evidence for an autoimmune pathophysiology. Exp Mol Pathol. 2008;84(2):90–101. doi:10.1016/j.yexmp.2007.10.006 [CrossRef]
  33. Yu M, Zou W, Peachey NS, McIntyre TM, Liu J. A novel role of complement in retinal degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:7684–7692. doi:10.1167/iovs.12-10069 [CrossRef]
  34. Bhutto IA, Baba T, Merges C, Juriasinghani V, McLeod DS, Lutty GA. C-reactive protein and complement factor H in aged human eyes and eyes with age-related macular degeneration. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95:1323–1330. doi:10.1136/bjo.2010.199216 [CrossRef]
  35. Ahn BY, Song ES, Cho YJ, Kwon OW, Kim JK, Lee NG. Identification of an anti-aldolase autoantibody as a diagnostic marker for diabetic retinopathy by immunoproteomic analysis. Proteomics. 2006;6:1200–1209. doi:10.1002/pmic.200500457 [CrossRef]
  36. Butterfield DA, Poon HF, St Clair D, et al. Redox proteomics identification of oxidatively modified hippocampal proteins in mild cognitive impairment: insights into the development of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiol Dis. 2006;22:223–232. doi:10.1016/j.nbd.2005.11.002 [CrossRef]
  37. Scott SE, Bouhenni RA, Chomyk AM, et al. Anti-retinal antibodies in serum of laser-treated rabbits. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:1764–1772. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-7685 [CrossRef]
  38. Snider NT, Weerasinghe SV, Singla A, et al. Energy determinants GAPDH and NDPK act as genetic modifiers for hepatocyte inclusion formation. J Cell Biol. 2011;195:217–229. doi:10.1083/jcb.201102142 [CrossRef]

Inflammatory Marker Levels Before and After Laser Injury

AntibodyAverage Pre-LaserSD Pre-LaserAverage Post-LaserSD Post-LaserP Value
Complement C31,004.07182.563,655.44618.921.5E-06
CRP466.82174.192,029.95734.100.000481
PKM2-2450.9874.051,017.68328.130.002055
Calreticulin154.4638.08681.24192.806.34E-05
Collagen V98.1727.19549.82131.889.31E-06
H. pylori92.0637.65486.28161.190.000165
Collagen VI144.3027.49460.75107.863.88E-05
CFB113.8236.80457.8391.726.71E-06
Haptoqlobin101.0724.93408.6098.652.31E-05
Ceruloplasmin93.1124.37396.2698.512.55E-05
b2-microglobulin92.9660.00342.0255.762.19E-05
Factor X108.3420.35339.8833.825.29E-08
SOD178.5415.84302.4352.981.72E-06
Aldolase110.7020.83280.6261.908.11E-05
Annexin V47.8513.45277.0348.105.39E-07
CNPase45.8112.87170.5634.458.43E-06
Annexin II55.6815.89169.0424.772.7E-06
CK-BB27.258.47143.0829.973.71E-06
Apo B23.1511.54124.3126.436.26E-06
RBP32.549.5897.5817.841.37E-05
Transferin38.5610.3482.4013.458.58E-05
L-Glutamine Synthetase3.404.3623.7016.280.01451
Recoverin1.142.7715.7310.300.007333
Calmodulin0.0030.0056.8632.4604.56E-05
Inflammatory Marker Levels Before and After Laser Injury

Table:

Inflammatory Marker Levels Before and After Laser Injury

10.3928/23258160-20150323-11

Sign up to receive

Journal E-contents