Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26762419›Full record

ReviewDrug delivery and translational research2016

In vitro and ex vivo corneal penetration and absorption models.

Priyanka Agarwal, Ilva D Rupenthal

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug delivery and translational research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 3D printed system usingInternational journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Nanomedicine in Ophthalmology: From Bench to Bedside.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Priyanka AgarwalBuchanan Ocular Therapeutics Unit, Department of Ophthalmology, New Zealand National Eye Centre, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand.
Ilva D RupenthalBuchanan Ocular Therapeutics Unit, Department of Ophthalmology, New Zealand National Eye Centre, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand. i.rupenthal@auckland.ac.nz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Topical drug administration is the preferred route of drug delivery to the eye despite the poor bioavailability. To develop more efficient drug carriers, reliable in vitro or ex vivo models are required in the early stages of formulation development, with such methods being faster, cheaper, and more ethical alternatives to in vivo studies. In vitro cell culture models are increasingly being used for transcorneal penetration studies, with primary cell cultures and immortalized cell lines now giving way to the development of organotypic corneal constructs for studying ocular drug bioavailability. Artificially cultured human corneal equivalents are still in the early stages of development, but present tremendous potential for corneal penetration studies. Ex vivo models using excised animal tissue are also being used to study corneal penetration with promising results, although significant inter-species variations need to be considered. This review discusses the in vitro and ex vivo models currently being used to study corneal penetration and evaluates their advantages and limitations with a focus on diffusion cell assemblies. In addition to the tissue used, the diffusion cell set-up can significantly influence the penetration profile and should be cautiously adjusted to simulate clinical conditions.

Indexed as

AnimalsCorneaCulture TechniquesDiffusionHumansModels, AnimalPermeabilityCorneal penetrationDiffusion cellsEx vivo modelsIn vitro modelsOcular drug delivery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.