Effects of Four Formulations of Prostaglandin Analogs on Eye Surface Cells. A Comparative Study

PLoS One. 2015 Jun 12;10(6):e0129419. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129419. eCollection 2015.

Abstract

We evaluated the cytotoxic effects of four prostaglandin analogs (PGAs) used to treat glaucoma. First we established primary cultures of conjunctival stromal cells from healthy donors. Then cell cultures were incubated with different concentrations (0, 0.1, 1, 5, 25, 50 and 100%) of commercial formulations of bimatoprost, tafluprost, travoprost and latanoprost for increasing periods (5 and 30 min, 1 h, 6 h and 24 h) and cell survival was assessed with three different methods: WST-1, MTT and calcein/AM-ethidium homodimer-1 assays. Our results showed that all PGAs were associated with a certain level of cell damage, which correlated significantly with the concentration of PGA used, and to a lesser extent with culture time. Tafluprost tended to be less toxic than bimatoprost, travoprost and latanoprost after all culture periods. The results for WST-1, MTT and calcein/AM-ethidium homodimer-1 correlated closely. When the average lethal dose 50 was calculated, we found that the most cytotoxic drug was latanoprost, whereas tafluprost was the most sparing of the ocular surface in vitro. These results indicate the need to design novel PGAs with high effectiveness but free from the cytotoxic effects that we found, or at least to obtain drugs that are functional at low dosages. The fact that the commercial formulation of tafluprost used in this work was preservative-free may support the current tendency to eliminate preservatives from eye drops for clinical use.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Cell Survival
  • Cells, Cultured
  • Conjunctiva / drug effects*
  • Humans
  • Prostaglandins / adverse effects*

Substances

  • Prostaglandins

Grants and funding

This study was supported by the Spanish Plan Nacional de Investigación Científica, Desarrollo e Innovación Tecnológica (I+D+I) from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Instituto de Salud Carlos III), grants FIS PI11/1582 and FIS PI14/0955 (co-financed by FEDER funds, European Union) and by Grant P10-CTS-6060 from the Consejería de Economía, Innovación, Ciencia y Empleo, Junta de Andalucia, Spain (Proyectos de Excelencia). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.