4.7 Article

Topical administration of the kappa opioid receptor agonist nalfurafine suppresses corneal neovascularization and inflammation

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-88118-6

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed that topical administration of the kappa opioid receptor agonist nalfurafine can significantly suppress corneal neovascularization, reduce the expression levels of inflammatory factors, and prevent and control CNV.
Corneal neovascularization (CNV) causes higher-order aberrations, corneal edema, ocular inflammation, and corneal transplant rejection, thereby decreasing visual acuity. In this study, we investigated the effects of topical administration of the kappa opioid receptor agonist nalfurafine (TRK-820) on CNV. To induce CNV, intrastromal corneal sutures were placed on the corneal stroma of BALB/c mice for 2 weeks. Nalfurafine (0.1 mu g/2 mu L/eye) was topically administered to the cornea once or twice daily after CNV induction. The CNV score, immune cell infiltration, and mRNA levels of angiogenic and pro-inflammatory factors in neovascularized corneas were evaluated using slit-lamp microscopy, immunohistochemistry, flow cytometry, and polymerase chain reaction. The mRNA expression of the kappa opioid receptor gene Oprk1 was significantly upregulated following CNV induction. Topical administration of nalfurafine twice daily significantly suppressed CNV and lymphangiogenesis, as well as reduced the mRNA levels of angiogenic and pro-inflammatory factors in the neovascularized corneas. Moreover, nalfurafine administration twice daily reduced the numbers of infiltrating leukocytes, neutrophils, macrophages, and interferon-gamma -producing CD4(+) T cells in the neovascularized corneas. In this study, we demonstrated that topical administration of nalfurafine suppressed local CNV in a mouse model along with the activation of KOR, suggesting that nalfurafine may prevent and control CNV in humans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据