The objective of this study was to develop an ocular drug delivery system built on the cationic liposomes, a novel bioadhesive colloidal system, which could enhance the precorneal residence time, ocular permeation, and bioavailability of ibuprofen. The optimal formulation of cationic liposomes prepared by ethanol injection method was ultimately confirmed by an orthogonal L (3) test design. In addition, γ-scintigraphic technology and the microdialysis technique were utilized in the assessment of in vivo precorneal retention capability and ocular bioavailability individually. In the end, we acquired the optimal formulation of ibuprofen cationic liposomes (Ibu-CL) by orthogonal test design, and the particle size and entrapment efficiency (EE%) were 121.0 ± 3.5 nm and 72.9 ± 3.4%, respectively. In comparison to ibuprofen eye drops (Ibu-ED), Ibu-CL could significantly prolong the T to 100 min and the AUC to 1.53-folds, which indicated that the Ibu-CL could improve the precorneal retention time and bioavailability of ibuprofen. Consequently, these outcomes designated that the ibuprofen cationic liposomes we researched probably are a promising application in ocular drug delivery system.

ObjectiveAmyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ-PET) scan has been proposed to detect amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in the brain. However, this approach is costly and not ideal for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Blood-based Aβ measurement offers a scalable alternative to the costly or invasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to statistically validate whether plasma Aβ could predict Aβ-PET status via meta-analysis.MethodsWe systematically searched for eligible studies from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library, which reported plasma Aβ levels of amyloid-β positron emission tomography-positive (PET (+)) and amyloid-β positron emission tomography-negative (PET (−)) subjects. We generated pooled estimates using random effects meta-analyses. For any study that has significant heterogeneity, metaregression and subgroup analysis were further conducted. Publication bias was appraised by funnel plots and Egger’s test.Results16 studies with 3047 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Among all the enrolled studies, 10 studies reported plasma Aβ40 values, while 9 studies reported plasma Aβ42 values and 13 studies reported Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. The pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.76 (95% CI −0.61 to 2.14, p=0.28) in the plasma Aβ40 values group. Plasma Aβ42 values group has a pooled SMD of −0.60 (95% CI −0.80 to −0.41, p<0.0001). In the plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio group, the pooled SMD was −1.44 (95% CI −2.17 to −0.72, p<0.0001).ConclusionPlasma Aβ40 values might not distinguish between PET (+) and PET (−) people. However, plasma Aβ42 values and plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio could be served as independent biomarkers for predicting Aβ-PET status.

No abstract