Safety evaluation of ocular drug delivery formulations: Techniques and practical considerations
Open accessAbstract
Development of new drug candidates and novel delivery techniques for treatment of ocular diseases has recently accelerated. Treatment of anterior-segment diseases has witnessed advances in prodrug formulations and permeability enhancers. Intravitreal, subconjunctival, and periocular routes of administration and sustained-release formulations of nanoparticles and microparticles, as well as nonbiodegradable and biodegradable implants to deliver drugs to the posterior segment of the eye, are becoming popular therapeutic approaches. Without adequate regulatory guidance for ocular drugs, such routes of administration and novel formulations can pose unique challenges to those involved in designing nonclinical programs, including considering clinical and nonclinical factors and choosing species, strains, and ocular toxicity parameters. Toxicologic pathologists also contribute practical experience to evaluating morphological effects of these novel formulations. Lastly, understanding species’ anatomical differences is useful for interpreting toxicological and pathological responses to the eye and is important for human risk assessment of these important new therapies for ocular diseases.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Animal models may not always provide reliable data on this issue.
“Unfortunately, animal models may not always provide reliable data on this issue [268].”
From Bruch’s Membrane: A Key Consideration with Complement-Based Therapies for Age-Related Macular Degeneration (2023) · cites this paper as [268]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 40 · Cited by 244
- Authors
- Short, B. G.
- Affiliations
- Allergan (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Short, Brian G.
- ORCID
- Short, Brian G.
- Venue
- Toxicologic Pathology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-62
- ISSN
- 0192-6233 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-1601
- OpenAlex
- W2107027855
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 3.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Toxicologic Pathology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Drug-Induced Ocular Toxicity
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Keywords
- ocular drug delivery, ocular toxicity, penetration enhancers, intravitreal administration, subconjunctival administration, microparticles, ocular implants, anterior segment diseases, posterior segment diseases, species selection, risk assessment
- MeSH terms
- Drug Administration Routes, Drug Carriers, Drug Implants, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Eye, Eye Diseases, Humans, Prodrugs, Drug Delivery Systems, Toxicity Tests, Nanoparticles, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review