Discontinuation of contact lens wear as a result of ocular dryness and discomfort is extremely common; as many as 26% of contact lens wearers discontinue use within the first year. While patients are generally satisfied with conventional hydrogel lenses, improving on-eye comfort continues to remain a goal. Surface modification with a biomimetic, ocular friendly hydrophilic layer of a wetting agent is hypothesized to improve the interfacial interactions of the contact lens with the ocular surface. In this work, the synthesis and characterization of poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) surfaces grafted with a hydrophilic layer of hyaluronic acid are described. The immobilization reaction involved the covalent attachment of thiolated hyaluronic acid (20 kDa) on acrylated poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) via nucleophile-initiated Michael addition thiol-ene “click” chemistry. The surface chemistry of the modified surfaces was analyzed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy–attenuated total reflectance and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The appearance of N (1s) and S (2p) peaks on the low resolution X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy spectra confirmed successful immobilization of hyaluronic acid. Grafting hyaluronic acid to the poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) surfaces decreased the contact angle, the dehydration rate, and the amount of nonspecific sorption of lysozyme and albumin in comparison to pristine hydrogel materials, suggesting the development of more wettable surfaces with improved water-retentive and antifouling properties, while maintaining optical transparency (>92%). In vitro testing also showed excellent viability of human corneal epithelial cells with the hyaluronic acid-grafted poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) surfaces. Hence, surface modification with hyaluronic acid via thiol-ene “click” chemistry could be useful in improving contact lens surface properties, potentially alleviating symptoms of contact lens related dryness and discomfort during wear.
NicholsJJ. 2014 Annual Report. Contact lenses 2014. The industry maintained healthy growth in 2014, with some categories poised for strong expansion. Contact lens Spectr2015; 30: 22–27.
2.
YoungGVeysJPritchardNet al.A multi-centre study of lapsed contact lens wearers. Ophthal Physiol Opt2002; 22: 516–527.
3.
DumbletonKWoodsCAJonesLWet al.The impact of contemporary contact lenses on contact lens discontinuation. Eye Contact Lens2013; 39: 93–99.
4.
FonnDSituPSimpsonT. Hydrogel lens dehydration and subjective comfort and dryness ratings in symptomatic and asymptomatic contact lens wearers. Optom Vis Sci1999; 76: 700–704.
5.
EfronNBrennanNABruceASet al.Dehydration of hydrogel lenses under normal wearing conditions. CLAO J1987; 13: 152–156.
6.
FonnD. Targeting contact lens induced dryness and discomfort: what properties will make lenses more comfortable. Optom Vis Sci2007; 84: 279–285.
7.
ValintPLAmmonDMGrobeGLet al.In-situ surface modification of contact lens polymers. In: Surface modification of polymeric biomaterials, Boston, MA: Springer US, 1996, pp. 21–26.
8.
LeahyCDMandellRBLinST. Initial in vivo tear protein deposition on individual hydrogel contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci1990; 67: 504–511.
9.
LuensmannDJonesL. Protein deposition on contact lenses: the past, the present, and the future. Contact Lens Anterior Eye2012; 35: 53–64.
10.
PetersonRCWolffsohnJSNickJet al.Clinical performance of daily disposable soft contact lenses using sustained release technology. Contact Lens Anterior Eye2006; 29: 127–134.
MoradiOModarressHNorooziM. Experimental study of albumin and lysozyme adsorption onto acrylic acid (AA) and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) surfaces. J Colloid Interface Sci2004; 271: 16–19.
13.
LordMSStenzelMHSimmonsAet al.The effect of charged groups on protein interactions with poly(HEMA) hydrogels. Biomaterials2006; 27: 567–575.
14.
NicolsonPCVogtJ. Soft contact lens polymers: an evolution. Biomaterials2001; 22: 3273–3283.
15.
WintertonLCLallyJMSentellKBet al.The elution of poly (vinyl alcohol) from a contact lens: the realization of a time release moisturizing agent/artificial tear. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater2007; 80B: 424–432.
16.
WhiteCJThomasCRByrneME. Bringing comfort to the masses: a novel evaluation of comfort agent solution properties. Contact Lens Anterior Eye2014; 37: 81–91.
17.
ThaiLCTomlinsonASimmonsPA. In vitro and in vivo effects of a lubricant in a contact lens solution. Ophthal Physiol Opt2002; 22: 319–329.
18.
WhiteCJMcBrideMKPateKMet al.Extended release of high molecular weight hydroxypropyl methylcellulose from molecularly imprinted, extended wear silicone hydrogel contact lenses. Biomaterials2011; 32: 5698–5675. .
19.
YañezFConcheiroAAlvarez-LorenzoC. Macromolecule release and smoothness of semi-interpenetrating PVP–pHEMA networks for comfortable soft contact lenses. Eur J Pharm Biopharm2008; 69: 1094–1103.
20.
TokiIKomatsuMShimizuYet al.Surface modification of contact lenses using adsorption of ethylene oxide branched copolymers. J Appl Polym Sci2013; 127: 3657–3662.
21.
BozukovaDPagnoulleCDe Pauw-GilletM-Cet al.Imparting antifouling properties of poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) hydrogels by grafting poly(oligoethylene glycol methyl ether acrylate). Langmuir2008; 24: 6649–6658.
22.
WangJLiX. Enhancing protein resistance of hydrogels based on poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) and poly(2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine) with interpenetrating network structure. J Appl Polym Sci2011; 121: 3347–3352.
23.
BenganiLCScheiffeleGWChauhanA. Incorporation of polymerizable surfactants in hydroxyethyl methacrylate lenses for improving wettability and lubricity. J Colloid Interface Sci2015; 445: 60–68.
24.
SchwarzSNickJ. Effectiveness of lubricating daily disposable lenses with different additives. Optician2006; 231: 22–26.
25.
YoungGBowersRHallBet al.Six month clinical evaluation of a biomimetic hydrogel contact lens. CLAO J1997; 23: 226–236.
26.
LempMACafferyBLebowKet al.Omafilcon A (Proclear) soft contact lenses in a dry eye population. CLAO J1999; 25: 40–47.
27.
Engström-LaurentA. Hyaluronan in joint disease. J Intern Med1997; 242: 57–60.
28.
MoriSNaitoMMoriyamaS. Highly viscous sodium hyaluronate and joint lubrication. Int Orthop2002; 26: 116–121.
29.
BalazsEAArmandG. Glycosaminoglycans and proteoglycans of ocular tissues. In: Glycosaminoglycans and proteoglycans in physiological and pathological processes of body systems, Basel: S. Karger AG, 1982, pp. 480–499.
30.
YoshidaKNitatoriYUchiyamaY. Localization of glycosaminoglycans and CD44 in the human lacrimal gland. Arch Histol Cytol1996; 59: 505–513.
LernerLESchwartzDMHwangDGet al.Hyaluronan and CD44 in the human cornea and limbal conjunctiva. Exp Eye Res1998; 67: 481–484.
33.
FukudaKMiyamotoY. Hyaluronic acid in tear fluid and its synthesis by corneal epithelial cells. Asia-Pacific J Ophthalmol1998; 40: 62–65.
34.
DaviesAGormallyJWyn-JonesEet al.A study of hydration of sodium hyaluronate from compressibility and high precision densitometric measurements. Int J Biol Macromol1982; 4: 436–438.
VolpiN. Therapeutic applications of glycosaminoglycans. Curr Med Chem2006; 13: 1799–1810.
37.
DelmageJMPowarsDRJaynesPKet al.The selective suppression of immunogenicity by hyaluronic acid. Ann Clin Lab Sci1986; 16: 303–310.
38.
KoganGSoltésLSternRet al.Hyaluronic acid: a natural biopolymer with a broad range of biomedical and industrial applications. Biotechnol Lett2007; 29: 17–25.
39.
RahMJ. A review of hyaluronan and its ophthalmic applications. Optometry2011; 82: 38–43.
40.
VolpiNSchillerJSternRet al.Role, metabolism, chemical modifications and applications of hyaluronan. Curr Med Chem2009; 16: 1718–1745.
41.
FraserJRELaurentTCLaurentUBG. Hyaluronan: its nature, distribution, functions and turnover. J Intern Med1997; 242: 27–33.
42.
O'BrienPDCollumLMT. Dry eye: diagnosis and current treatment strategies. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep2004; 4: 314–319.
43.
Szczotka-FlynnLB. Chemical properties of contact lens rewetters. Contact Lens Spectr2006; 21: 11–19.
44.
StuartJCLinnJG. Dilute sodium hyaluronate (Healon) in the treatment of ocular surface disorders. Ann Ophthalmol1985; 17: 190–192.
45.
DoughtyMJGlavinS. Efficacy of different dry eye treatments with artificial tears or ocular lubricants: a systematic review. Ophthal Physiol Opt2009; 29: 573–583.
46.
LiuXHuangRSuRet al.Grafting hyaluronic acid onto gold surface to achieve low protein fouling in surface plasmon resonance biosensors. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2014; 6: 13034–13042.
47.
OmbelliMCostelloLPostleCet al.Competitive protein adsorption on polysaccharide and hyaluronate modified surfaces. Biofouling2011; 27: 505–518.
48.
HuangRLiuXYeHet al.Conjugation of hyaluronic acid onto surfaces via the interfacial polymerization of dopamine to prevent protein adsorption. Langmuir2015; 31: 12061–12070.
49.
WangYGuoLRenLet al.A study on the performance of hyaluronic acid immobilized chitosan film. Biomed Mater2009; 4: 1–7.
50.
HuXNeohK-GShiZet al.An in vitro assessment of titanium functionalized with polysaccharides conjugated with vascular endothelial growth factor for enhanced osseointegration and inhibition of bacterial adhesion. Biomaterials2010; 31: 8854–8863.
ScheuerCAFridmanKMBarniakVLet al.Retention of conditioning agent hyaluronan on hydrogel contact lenses. Contact Lens Anterior Eye2010; 33: S2–S6.
53.
AliMByrneME. Controlled release of high molecular weight hyaluronic acid from molecularly imprinted hydrogel contact lenses. Pharm Res2009; 26: 714–726.
54.
MaulviFASoniTGShahDO. Extended release of hyaluronic acid from hydrogel contact lenses for dry eye syndrome. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2015; 26: 1035–10350.
55.
Van BeekMJonesLSheardownH. Hyaluronic acid containing hydrogels for the reduction of protein adsorption. Biomaterials2008; 29: 780–789.
56.
WeeksASubbaramanLNJonesLet al.The competing effects of hyaluronic and methacrylic acid in model contact lenses. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2012; 23: 1021–1038.
57.
WeeksAMorrisonDAlauzunJGet al.Photocrosslinkable hyaluronic acid as an internal wetting agent in model conventional and silicone hydrogel contact lenses. J Biomed Mater Res A2012; 100: 1972–1982.
58.
KimH-JRyuG-CJeongK-Set al.Hydrogel lenses functionalized with polysaccharide for reduction of protein adsorption. Macromol Res2015; 23: 74–78.
59.
HuXHTanHPLiDet al.Surface functionalisation of contact lenses by CS/HA multilayer film to improve its properties and deliver drugs. Mater Technol2014; 29: 8–13.
60.
SinghALiPBeachleyVet al.A hyaluronic acid-binding contact lens with enhanced water retention. Contact Lens Anterior Eye2015; 38: 79–84.
61.
DengXKorogiannakiMRastegariBet al.“Click” chemistry-tethered hyaluronic acid-based contact lens coatings improve lens wettability and lower protein adsorption. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2016; 8: 22064–22073.
62.
O'BrienPJSirakiAGShangariN. Aldehyde sources, metabolism, molecular toxicity mechanisms, and possible effects on human health. Crit Rev Toxicol2005; 35: 609–662.
63.
LoweAB. Thiol-ene “click” reactions and recent applications in polymer and materials synthesis. Polym Chem2010; 1: 17–36.
64.
ChanJWHoyleCELoweABet al.Nucleophile-initiated thiol-Michael reactions: effect of organocatalyst, thiol, and ene. Macromolecules2010; 43: 6381–6388.
65.
HoyleCEBowmanCN. Thiol-ene click chemistry. Angew Chemie Int Ed2010; 49: 1540–1573.
66.
KumariSMalviBGanaiAKet al.Functionalization of SBA-15 mesoporous materials using “thiol-ene click” Michael addition reaction. J Phys Chem C2011; 115: 17774–17781.
67.
LiuMTanBHBurfordRPet al.Nucleophilic thiol-Michael chemistry and hyperbranched (co)polymers: synthesis and ring-opening metathesis (co)polymerization of novel difunctional exo-7-oxanorbornenes with in situ inimer formation. Polym Chem2013; 4: 3300.
68.
ChanJWYuBHoyleCEet al.The nucleophilic, phosphine-catalyzed thiol-ene click reaction and convergent star synthesis with RAFT-prepared homopolymers. Polymer2009; 50: 3158–3168.
69.
ChanJWWeiHZhouHet al.The effects of primary amine catalyzed thio-acrylate Michael reaction on the kinetics, mechanical and physical properties of thio-acrylate networks. Eur Polym J2009; 45: 2717–2725.
70.
LiG-ZRandevRKSoeriyadiAHet al.Investigation into thiol-(meth)acrylate Michael addition reactions using amine and phosphine catalysts. Polym Chem2010; 1: 1196–1204.
71.
WongLKavallarisMBulmusV. Doxorubicin conjugated, crosslinked, PEGylated particles prepared via one-pot thiol-ene modification of a homopolymer scaffold: synthesis and in vitro evaluation. Polym Chem2011; 2: 385–393.
WangHSunHWeiHet al.Biocompatible hyaluronic acid polymer-coated quantum dots for CD44 + cancer cell-targeted imaging. J Nanoparticle Res2014; 16: 2621.
74.
LambethDOEricsonGRYorekMAet al.Implications for in vitro studies of the autoxidation of ferrous ion and the iron-catalyzed autoxidation of dithiothreitol. Biochim Biophys Acta1982; 719: 501–508.
75.
BurnsJAButlerJCMoranJet al.Selective reduction of disulfides by tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine. J Org Chem1991; 56: 2648–2650.
76.
HanJCHanGY. A procedure for quantitative determination of tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine, an odorless reducing agent more stable and effective than dithiothreitol. Anal Biochem1994; 220: 5–10.
KurzerFDouraghi-ZadehK. Advances in the chemistry of carbodiimides. Chem Rev1967; 67: 107–152.
79.
BulpittPAeschlimannD. New strategy for chemical modification of hyaluronic acid: preparation of functionalized derivatives and their use in the formation of novel biocompatible hydrogels. J Biomed Mater Res1999; 47: 152–169.
80.
SanthanamSLiangJBaidRet al.Investigating thiol-modification on hyaluronan via carbodiimide chemistry using response surface methodology. J Biomed Mater Res A2015; 103: 2300–2308.
81.
ClineDJReddingSEBrohawnSGet al.New water-soluble phosphines as reductants of peptide and protein disulfide bonds: reactivity and membrane permeability. Biochemistry2004; 43: 15195–15203.
82.
JocelynPC. Biochemistry of the SH group: the occurrence, chemical properties, metabolism and biological function of thiols and disulphides, 2nd ed. London: Academic Press, 1972, pp. 404.
83.
KöwitschAJurado AbreuMChhalotreAet al.Synthesis of thiolated glycosaminoglycans and grafting to solid surfaces. Carbohydr Polym2014; 114: 344–351.
84.
SocratesG. Infrared and raman characteristic group frequencies?: tables and charts, 3rd ed. Chichester / New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2001, pp. 347.
OuastiSDonnoRCellesiFet al.Network connectivity, mechanical properties and cell adhesion for hyaluronic acid/PEG hydrogels. Biomaterials2011; 32: 6456–6470.
87.
LutolfMPTirelliNCerritelliSet al.Systematic modulation of Michael-type reactivity of thiols through the use of charged amino acids. Bioconjug Chem2001; 12: 1051–1056.
88.
SlavinSHaddletonDM. An investigation into thiol-ene surface chemistry of poly(ethylene glycol) acrylates, methacrylates and CCTP polymers via quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation monitoring (QCM-D). Soft Matter2012; 8: 10388.
89.
HeggliMTirelliNZischAet al.Michael-type addition as a tool for surface functionalization. Bioconjug Chem2003; 14: 967–973.
90.
ElbertDLPrattABLutolfMPet al.Protein delivery from materials formed by self-selective conjugate addition reactions. J Control Release2001; 76: 11–25.
91.
SchyrrBPascheSVoirinGet al.Biosensors based on porous cellulose nanocrystal–poly(vinyl alcohol) scaffolds. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2014; 6: 12674–12683.
92.
CampbellDCarnellSMEdenRJ. Applicability of contact angle techniques used in the analysis of contact lenses, Part 1. Eye Contact Lens Sci Clin Pract2013; 39: 254–262.
93.
CassinelliCMorraMPavesioAet al.Evaluation of interfacial properties of hyaluronan coated poly(methylmethacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2000; 11: 961–977.
94.
LinMCSvitovaTF. Contact lenses wettability in vitro: effect of surface-active ingredients. Optom Vis Sci2010; 87: 440–447.
95.
Maldonado-CodinaCMorganPB. In vitro water wettability of silicone hydrogel contact lenses determined using the sessile drop and captive bubble techniques. J Biomed Mater Res Part A2007; 83A: 496–502.
96.
ChengLMullerSJRadkeCJ. Wettability of silicone-hydrogel contact lenses in the presence of tear-film components. Curr Eye Res2004; 28: 93–108.
97.
TongeSJonesLGoodallSet al.The ex vivo wettability of soft contact lenses. Curr Eye Res2001; 23: 51–59.
98.
HollyFJRefojoMF. Wettability of hydrogels I. Poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate). J Biomed Mater Res1975; 9: 315–326.
99.
Baleriola-LucasCFukudaMWillcoxMDet al.Fibronectin concentration in tears of contact lens wearers. Exp Eye Res1997; 64: 37–43.
100.
McArthurSLMcLeanKMSt. JohnHAet al.XPS and surface-MALDI-MS characterisation of worn HEMA-based contact lenses. Biomaterials2001; 22: 3295–3304.
101.
PorazinskiADDonshikPC. Giant papillary conjunctivitis in frequent replacement contact lens wearers: a retrospective study. CLAO J1999; 25: 142–147.
KotowMHoldenBAGrantT. The value of regular replacement of low water content contact lenses for extended wear. J Am Optom Assoc1987; 58: 461–464.
104.
ButrusSIKlotzSA. Contact lens surface deposits increase the adhesion of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Curr Eye Res1990; 9: 717–724.
105.
TaylorRLWillcoxMDPWilliamsTJet al.Modulation of bacterial adhesion to hydrogel contact lenses by albumin. Optom Vis Sci1998; 75: 23–29.
106.
ButrusSIKlotzSAMisraRP. The adherence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to soft contact lenses. Ophthalmology1987; 94: 1310–1314.
107.
van BeekMWeeksAJonesLet al.Immobilized hyaluronic acid containing model silicone hydrogels reduce protein adsorption. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed2008; 19: 1425–1436.
108.
GarrettQChatelierRCGriesserHJet al.Effect of charged groups on the adsorption and penetration of proteins onto and into carboxymethylated poly(HEMA) hydrogels. Biomaterials1998; 19: 2175–2186.
SzleiferI. Protein adsorption on tethered polymer layers: effect of polymer chain architecture and composition. Phys A Stat Mech Appl1997; 244: 370–388.
111.
ChenAKozakDBattersbyBJet al.Particle-by-particle quantification of protein adsorption onto poly(ethylene glycol) grafted surfaces. Biofouling2008; 24: 267–273.
112.
KolasińskaMWarszyńskiP. The effect of nature of polyions and treatment after deposition on wetting characteristics of polyelectrolyte multilayers. Appl Surf Sci2005; 252: 759–765.
113.
BednarzJTeifelMFriedlPet al.Immortalization of human corneal endothelial cells using electroporation protocol optimized for human corneal endothelial and human retinal pigment epithelial cells. Acta Ophthalmol Scand2000; 78: 130–136.
114.
OffordEASharifNAMacéKet al.Immortalized human corneal epithelial cells for ocular toxicity and inflammation studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci1999; 40: 1091–1101.
115.
DingJHeRZhouGet al.Multilayered mucoadhesive hydrogel films based on thiolated hyaluronic acid and polyvinylalcohol for insulin delivery. Acta Biomater2012; 8: 3643–3651.
116.
LiHLiuYShuXZet al.Synthesis and biological evaluation of a cross-linked hyaluronan-mitomycin C hydrogel. Biomacromolecules2004; 5: 895–902.
117.
HeYChengGXieLet al.Polyethyleneimine/DNA polyplexes with reduction-sensitive hyaluronic acid derivatives shielding for targeted gene delivery. Biomaterials2013; 34: 1235–1245.
118.
WirostkoBMannBKWilliamsDLet al.Ophthalmic uses of a thiol-modified hyaluronan-based hydrogel. Adv Wound Care2014; 3: 708–716.
119.
YangGPrestwichGDMannBKet al.Thiolated carboxymethyl-hyaluronic-acid-based biomaterials enhance wound healing in rats, dogs, and horses. ISRN Vet Sci2011; 2011: 1–7. .
