4.3 Article

Inhibition of Corneal Neovascularization by Subconjunctival Injection of Fc-Endostatin, a Novel Inhibitor of Angiogenesis

Journal

JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 2015, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2015/137136

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Kwok Family Research Fund
  2. Research Scholar Grant from the American Cancer Society [116293-RSG-08-11901-CCE]
  3. American Physicians Fellowship for Medicine in Israel

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We assessed the antiangiogenic effects of subconjunctival injection of Fc-endostatin (FcE) using a human vascular endothelial growth factor-induced rabbit corneal neovascularization model. Angiogenesis was induced in rabbit corneas through intrastromal implantations of VEGF polymer implanted 2 mm from the limbus. NZW rabbits were separated into groups receiving twice weekly subconjunctival injections of either saline; 25 mg/mL bevacizumab; 2 mg/mL FcE; or 20 mg/mL FcE. Corneas were digitally imaged at 5 time points. An angiogenesis index (AI) was calculated (vessel length (mm) x vessel number score) for each observation. All treatment groups showed a significant decrease in the vessel length and AI compared to saline on all observation days (P < 0.001). By day 15, FcE 2 inhibited angiogenesis significantly better than FcE 20 (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between FcE 2 and BV, although the values trended towards significantly increased inhibition by BV. BV was a significantly better inhibitor than FcE 20 by day 8 (P < 0.01). FcE was safe and significantly inhibited new vessel growth in a rabbit corneal neovascularization model. Lower concentration FcE 2 exhibited better inhibition than FcE 20, consistent with previous FcE studies referencing a biphasic dose-response curve. Additional studies are necessary to further elucidate the efficacy and clinical potential of this novel angiogenesis inhibitor.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available