Back

Antimicrobial concentrations in the cornea and aqueous humour: a meta-analysis

McLean, K.; Dawson, G.; Foulkes, D.; Herbert, R.; Popova, P.; Bernard-Deshong, D.; Massie, V.; Borgia, A.; Airaldi, M.; Somerville, T.; Czanner, G.; Neal, T.; Tuft, S.; Kaye, S. B.

2025-05-18 ophthalmology
10.1101/2025.05.16.25327782 medRxiv
Show abstract

AimTo interpret the likely clinical susceptibility of isolates from microbial keratitis we performed a meta-analysis of published data that measured the concentrations of, topically applied, antimicrobials in the cornea or aqueous humour. We then correlated these values with the in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Methods and AnalysisWe searched PubMed to identify studies reporting aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of 53 topically applied ocular antimicrobials, spanning the following classes: beta-lactams, glycopeptides, aminoglycosides, chloramphenicol, lincosamides, macrolides, oxazolidinones, steroidal antimicrobials, tetracyclines, diaminopyrimidines, sulfonamides, lipopeptides and polymyxins. For each class, two clinicians independently screened the abstracts. For articles that met the inclusion criteria, data were extracted on participant species, antimicrobial concentration, dosing regimens, epithelial status, and measurement methods. Concentrations were standardised to mg/L. First quartile concentrations (EQ1) were extrapolated from the mean and standard deviation or calculated from the contained data where available. The data were tabulated to generate the EQ1 concentrations for the aqueous and cornea of each antimicrobial, stratified by applied concentration and dosing regimen. ResultsWe screened 7247 publications. Eighty-one publications were included in the meta-analysis, comprising data on the aqueous and/or corneal concentrations of twenty-eight antimicrobials. Bioassay was the most frequently used method for quantifying antimicrobial concentrations (25 studies), followed by liquid chromatography and fluorescence assays (18 studies each), mass spectrometry (12 studies), and radioactivity and colorimetric assays (three studies each). ConclusionWe provide a practical resource for clinicians to assess whether the expected EQ1 of an antimicrobial in the cornea is above the in vitro MIC of the pathogen. This reduces reliance on systemic break-point concentrations enabling evidence-based antimicrobial treatment decisions for microbial keratitis. KEY MESSAGESO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on the topicC_ST_ABSMicrobial keratitis (MK) is a major cause of preventable blindness worldwide. The susceptibility of an isolate is based on systemic breakpoint criteria that may not reflect corneal or aqueous concentrations following topical application. What this study addsWe provide a comprehensive and standardised resource of corneal and aqueous antimicrobial concentrations following topical application. This enables treatment decisions based on the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of the isolate and the expected tissue concentration of the antimicrobial for evidence-based management of MK. How this study might affect research, practice or policyThis study provides a practical resource linking in vitro antimicrobial MIC values to anticipated ocular drug concentrations, enabling more precise treatment of microbial keratitis, supporting research and the development of clinical guidelines.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Eye
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
42.3%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 16%
11.2%
50% of probability mass above
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 21%
5.2%
4
British Journal of Ophthalmology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
5
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
6
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.9%
7
Translational Vision Science & Technology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
8
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.8%
9
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
10
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.8%
11
Vaccines
196 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
12
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
13
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
14
Annals of Translational Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.0%
15
Ophthalmology Science
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
16
Pathogens
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
17
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
18
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
37 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
19
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.7%
20
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
21
Journal of Hospital Infection
27 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
22
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
23
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%