Posterior segment eye diseases present a challenge in treatment due to the complex structures in the eye that serve as robust static and dynamic barriers, limiting the penetration, residence time, and bioavailability of topical and intraocular medications. This hinders effective treatment and requires frequent dosing, such as the regular use of eye drops or visits to the ophthalmologist for intravitreal injections, to manage the disease. Moreover, the drugs must be biodegradable to minimize toxicity and adverse reactions, as well as small enough to not affect the visual axis. The development of biodegradable nano-based drug delivery systems (DDSs) can be the solution to these challenges. First, they can stay in ocular tissues for longer periods of time, reducing the frequency of drug administration. Second, they can pass through ocular barriers, offering higher bioavailability to targeted tissues that are otherwise inaccessible. Third, they can be made up of polymers that are biodegradable and nanosized. Hence, therapeutic innovations in biodegradable nanosized DDS have been widely explored for ophthalmic drug delivery applications. In this review, we will present a concise overview of DDSs utilized in the treatment of ocular diseases. We will then examine the current therapeutic challenges faced in the management of posterior segment diseases and explore how various types of biodegradable nanocarriers can enhance our therapeutic arsenal. A literature review of the pre-clinical and clinical studies published between 2017 and 2023 was conducted. Through the advances in biodegradable materials, combined with a better understanding of ocular pharmacology, the nano-based DDSs have rapidly evolved, showing great promise to overcome challenges currently encountered by clinicians.

ImportanceRecommendations of clinical guidelines affect physicians’ care delivery. Potential bias and undeclared conflicts of interests (COIs) among guideline authors can impact clinical practice decisions.ObjectiveTo assess financial disclosures reported by physician authors of the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Practice Pattern Guidelines compared with those reported by industry to evaluate the disclosures’ accuracy.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this cross-sectional study, all clinical guidelines in the AAO Preferred Practice Patterns (PPP) since 2013 (first year with publicly available industry payment reports) were reviewed on May 1, 2022. Guideline physician authors’ name and their reported COI disclosure were extracted from the guideline publication. Payments to physician authors reported by industry were retrieved from the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Open Payments database. Physician authors serving on the AAO guideline committee were included.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome measure was the accuracy of authors’ COIs disclosure. Secondary outcome measures were payments to physician authors reported by industry, the types of payments, and authors’ gender.ResultsA total of 24 AAO guidelines released between 2016 and 2020 were included. Per guideline, there was a mean (SD) of 7.83 (2.24) physician authors. After removing 14 nonphysician authors, 188 physician author names remained, including 83 names assigned as women (44.1%) and 105 names assigned as men (55.9%). Authors could be counted multiple times in these 188 names. According to the Open Payments database, industry reported that 112 of 188 physician authors (59.6%) had at least received 1 payment while serving on the guideline committee, with a payment mean (SD) of $29 849.35 ($54 131.56). According to AAO guidelines, 149 authors (79.3%) had no financial disclosures while serving on the guideline committee. Among these 149 authors, most authors (81 [54.4%]) had payments reported by industry on the Open Payments database not disclosed within the guideline reports. Women physicians were paid significantly more than men for total payments (median [IQR] payments, $15 265 [$598.47-$41 104.67] vs $301.48 [$218.85-$14 615.09]; difference, $14 963.52; P = .003).Conclusions and RelevanceIndustry reported physician guideline authors to have received significant industry payments, some of which were not disclosed within information of the guidelines. To strengthen author transparency regarding these reported disclosures, the authors may want to review and resolve such potential discrepancies during the review and subsequent publication of guidelines.

No abstract

No abstract

S19 01The Queen Bee phenomenon in Canadian surgical subspecialties: an evaluation of gender biases in the resident training environment.