. Jensen presented convincing evidence for the use of the zebrafish over the oft-employed mouse as a translational model of human disease, and has used this to great effect in discovering new outcomes of anti-VEGF treatment of diabetic retinopathy of potential importance for improvement to treatments for the future.
Similarly, Dr. Tim Curtis (Queen’s University Belfast) reiterated the shortcomings of the aforementioned anti-VEGF therapeutic strategy, and presented his research groups findings examining the role of other pro-angiogenic factors in a diabetic retinopathy setting and gave a strong argument for their inclusion as therapeutic targets.
Prof. Yolanda Diebold Luque (University of Valladolid) then built upon the first two talks and reiterated in detail the importance in the choice in model for therapeutic development referring to the limitations of anti-VEGF treatments, with her talk covering how in vitro approaches have had to evolve to cope with the difficulties associated with acquiring and using human ocular tissue.
We then took a short break from in vitro and in vivo modelling, as Dr. Mark Mackey (Cresset) took us through in silico approach his company uses with which the biological activity of thousands of compounds can be determined for clients beforehand, with some interesting stories of drug reprofiling using said technique.
Dr. Natalie Hudson (Trinity College Dublin) then detailed her work on circadian clock components and their influence on the retinal function of mice. The circadian behaviour of proteins pertinent to retinal permeability was clearly highlighted with novel, unexplored therapeutic niches targeting endogenous proteins influenced by circadian rhythm as a therapeutic strategy looking incredibly promising.
Dr. Hanan Awad Alkozi (Ocupharm Diagnostics) then detailed her work looking at the therapeutic potential of a different endogenous protein; melatonin. Providing data from human subjects, Dr. Alkozi proposed that melatonin and its analogues offer great therapeutic potential in glaucoma treatment owing to its natural hypotensive properties.
To close the session, Mario Crespo Moral (University of Valladolid) continued with the melatonin theme in detailing his research elucidating the specific receptors and respective mechanisms that enable melatonin to induce a regenerative effect in the cornea using an ex vivo porcine model.
What was fascinating about this session was how it captured the diversity of approaches utilised in the ocular biology field. The importance of model selection was apparent as several existing therapies, such as anti-VEGF, are only partially effective in certain disease phenotypes; a limitation stemming from the models employed in their initial development. Human/pig/mouse/zebrafish, in vitro/in vivo/ex vivo/in silico; models within the ocular biology field are rapidly evolving, and the approaches on display in this session indicate, in certain cases, that the requisite for human tissue in order for effective research and development of therapeutics to be conducted could be a thing of the past.
After the lunch break/poster viewing we moved along the drug discovery pipeline from the theme of discovery to delivery as we examined the different innovative approaches being developed against specific pathologies.
Without a doubt, some of the greatest physiological barriers faced by pharmacologists are those located in the eye. Whilst topical treatment is the most convenient and by far the favoured means of delivery (the alternative involves frequent ocular exposure to sharp needles…), delivery is ultimately impeded by various naturally-occurring static and dynamic barriers, and efflux pumps, meaning any amount that happens to reach the area of interest is often not maintained at effective therapeutic doses for very long. This session aimed to cover the advanced research being conducted by some of the attendees in the area of method development for ocular therapeutic drug delivery systems.
Dr. Isabel Rodriguez Amado (International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory) got us under