Background and purpose
The intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering and side effects in response to different prostaglandin F2α analogues can be variable, but, the underlying basis for this difference remains unknown. This study investigated the differential changes of cellular proteins relevant to IOP-lowering effects of latanoprost and bimatoprost.
Conclusions
Similarities in protein expression produced by latanoprost and bimatoprost in vitro may be relevant to the mechanism for their IOP-lowering effects in vivo. Differences in fibronectin expression and in aquaporin-1 expression in response to each agent may contribute to variability in the IOP-lowering efficacy in some studies.
Methods
The human T lymphoblast (MOLT-3) cell line and immortalized human trabecular meshwork (iHTM) cells were studied by quantitative PCR and by immunofluorescence after treatment with either latanoprost or bimatoprost. New Zealand white rabbit eyes were treated topically with each agent and, following euthanasia, anterior segment tissues were studied with immunostaining.
Purpose
The intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering and side effects in response to different prostaglandin F2α analogues can be variable, but, the underlying basis for this difference remains unknown. This study investigated the differential changes of cellular proteins relevant to IOP-lowering effects of latanoprost and bimatoprost.
Results
In cultured MOLT-3 cells, mRNA expression of both c-fos and matrix metalloproteinase 9 increased significantly in response to each agent. In addition, there was little change in tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP)-3 mRNA, but a significant decrease in TIMP-4. Fibronectin mRNA in MOLT-3 cells was down-regulated with bimatoprost, but was up-regulated with latanoprost. Immunofluorescence analysis of iHTM cells showed that intracellular fibronectin was significantly decreased by bimatoprost, but was increased by latanoprost. Both latanoprost and bimatoprost increased mRNA expression of NF-кB p65 and decreased that of IкBα. Aquaporin-1 mRNA expression was significantly down-regulated by bimatoprost. Immunostaining also revealed a significant decrease of aquaporin-1 in the ciliary epithelium of New Zealand white rabbits after bimatoprost treatment. Conclusions: Similarities in protein expression produced by latanoprost and bimatoprost in vitro may be relevant to the mechanism for their IOP-lowering effects in vivo. Differences in fibronectin expression and in aquaporin-1 expression in response to each agent may contribute to variability in the IOP-lowering efficacy in some studies.