title: Comparison of ophthalmic sponges and extraction buffers for quantifying cytokine profiles in tears using Luminex technology.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Evaluating cytokine profiles in tears could shed light on the pathogenesis of various ocular surface diseases. When collecting tears with the methods currently available, it is often not possible to avoid the tear reflex, which may give a different cytokine profile compared to basal tears. More importantly, tear collection with glass capillaries, the most widely used method for taking samples and the best method for avoiding tear reflex, is impractical for remote area field studies because it is tedious and time-consuming for health workers, who cannot collect tears from a large number of patients with this method in one day. Furthermore, this method is uncomfortable for anxious patients and children. Thus, tears are frequently collected using ophthalmic sponges. These sponges have the advantage that they are well tolerated by the patient, especially children, and enable standardization of the tear collection volume. The aim of this study was to compare various ophthalmic sponges and extraction buffers to optimize the tear collection method for field studies for subsequent quantification of cytokines in tears using the Luminex technology.
  
  
  METHODS
  Three ophthalmic sponges, Merocel, Pro-ophta, and Weck-Cel, were tested. Sponges were presoaked with 25 cytokines/chemokines of known concentrations and eluted with seven different extraction buffers (EX1-EX7). To assess possible interference in the assay from the sponges, two standard curves were prepared in parallel: 1) cytokines of known concentrations with the extraction buffers and 2) cytokines of known concentrations loaded onto the sponges with the extraction buffers. Subsequently, a clinical assessment of the chosen sponge-buffer combination was performed with tears collected from four healthy subjects using 1) aspiration and 2) sponges. To quantify cytokine/chemokine recovery and the concentration in the tears, a 25-plex Cytokine Panel and the Luminex xMap were used. This platform enables simultaneous measurement of proinflammatory cytokines, Th1/Th2 distinguishing cytokines, nonspecific acting cytokines, and chemokines.
  
  
  RESULTS
  WE DEMONSTRATED THE FOLLOWING: (i) 25 cytokines/chemokines expressed highly variable interactions with buffers and matrices. Several buffers enabled recovery of similar cytokine values (regulated and normal T cell expressed and secreted [RANTES], interleukin [IL]-13, IL-6, IL-8, IL-2R, and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor [GM-CSF]); others were highly variable (monocyte chemotactic protein-1 [MCP-1], monokine induced by interferon-gamma [MIG], IL-1β, IL-4, IL-7, and eotaxin). (ii) Various extraction buffers displayed significantly different recovery rates on the same sponge for the same cytokine/chemokine. (iii) The highest recovery rates were obtained with the Merocel ophthalmic sponge except for tumor necrosis factor-α: the Weck-Cel ophthalmic sponge showed the best results, either with cytokine standards loaded onto sponges or with tears collected from the inner canthus of the eye, using the sponge. (iv) IL-5, IL-10, and interferon-α were not detected in any tear sample from four normal human subjects. Twenty-two cytokines/chemokines that we detected were extracted from the Merocel sponge to a satisfactory recovery percentage. The recovery of IL-7 was significantly lower in the extracted Merocel sponge compared to the diluted tear samples. The cytokine/chemokine extraction from tears showed the same pattern of extraction that we observed for extracting the standards.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Simultaneous measurement of various cytokines using ophthalmic sponges yielded diverse results for various cytokines as the level of extraction differs noticeably for certain cytokines. A second set of controls (standard curves "with sponges") should be used to delineate the extent of extraction for each cytokine to be analyzed. Many cytokines/chemokines were detected in tear samples collected with the Merocel sponge, including many that have been implicated in ocular surface disease. Luminex detection of cytokine/chemokine profiles of tears collected with Merocel sponges and extracted with buffer EX1 may be useful in clinical studies, for example, to assess cytokine profiles evaluation in ocular surface diseases.
authors.affiliation: OCUVAC - Centre of Ocular Inflammation and Infection, Laura Bassi Centres of Expertise, Institute of Specific Prophylaxis and Tropical Medicine, Centre for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
authors.forename: Aleksandra
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Inic-Kanada
authors.forename: Andrea
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Nussbaumer
authors.forename: Jacqueline
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Montanaro
authors.forename: Sandra
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Belij
authors.forename: Simone
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Schlacher
authors.forename: Elisabeth
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Stein
authors.forename: Nora
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Bintner
authors.forename: Margarethe
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Merio
authors.forename: Gerhard J
authors.initials: GJ
authors.lastname: Zlabinger
authors.forename: Talin
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Barisani-Asenbauer
mesh_terms: D000327:Adsorption; D000328:Adult; D002021:Buffers; D002138:Calibration; D016207:Cytokines / Q000032:analysis*; D005260:Female; D005557:Formaldehyde; D006801:Humans; D011142:Polyvinyl Alcohol; D012015:Reference Standards; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013048:Specimen Handling / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D013666:Tears / Q000737:chemistry*
chemical_list: D002021:Buffers; D016207:Cytokines; D005557:Formaldehyde; C027490:polyvinyl alcohol formaldehyde foam; D011142:Polyvinyl Alcohol