PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

Long Jiang

Publications and source records attributed to Long Jiang.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Preclinical evaluation of AL-001, a gene therapy for wet age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Frequent intravitreal administration of antivascular endothelial growth factor Vascular endothelial growth factor agents remains a major limitation in the management of wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD). This study evaluated whether suprachoroidal delivery of an engineered recombinant adeno-associated viral (rAAV)-aflibercept vector could achieve sustained, targeted expression with improved efficacy and safety compared with intravitreal administration. METHODS: AL-001, an engineered rAAV vector expressing aflibercept, was developed and characterized. Its expression profile was first assessed in New Zealand white rabbits following suprachoroidal space (SCS) injection. Efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety were then evaluated in a nonhuman primate model of laser-induced choroidal neovascularization (CNV), comparing SCS and intravitreal (IVT) administration routes. RESULTS: AL-001 efficiently expressed aflibercept in relevant ocular cells in vitro. In rabbits, SCS administration produced sustained aflibercept levels in ocular tissues. In the nonhuman primate CNV model, a single SCS injection of AL-001 showed favorable efficacy to IVT injection and a notable mild inflammatory response. At week 4, grade IV lesion incidence was 0% (0/48) after SCS administration versus 14.3% (6/42) after IVT administration (absolute difference, -14.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.7%-27.8%; P = 0.0258). Throughout follow-up, mean leakage area and grade IV lesion incidence remained 0 with SCS, versus IVT peaks of approximately 0.3 mm2 and 33.0%, respectively, declining to 0.03 mm2 and 2.0% by day 100. Both the medium and high doses decreased pathological vascular leakage and subretinal hyperreflective material. Vector administration preceded laser-induced CNV modeling, demonstrating that sustained intraocular aflibercept expression in the retina and choroid provided durable antiangiogenic protection. Pharmacokinetic analysis confirmed distinct ocular exposure profiles between routes, with viral genomes confined predominantly to the injected eye and no significant systemic accumulation. AL-001 was well tolerated, without sustained intraocular pressure elevation or severe ocular inflammation, and only mild-to-moderate treatment-emergent adverse events. Low pre-existing anti-AAV2 immunity and time-dependent neutralizing antibody responses postdosing, informing a translational model for patient stratification and redosing feasibility. CONCLUSION: Suprachoroidal administration of AL-001 is well tolerated and provides durable, targeted aflibercept expression with pronounced antiangiogenic efficacy. These results support AL-001 as a promising, long-acting therapeutic candidate for wAMD.

AAV

Comparing the Efficacy of Mechanochemical Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Treating Great Saphenous Vein Incompetence: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence. METHODS: Online databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing MOCA and RFA in the treatment of varicose veins in lower extremities from database inception to October 2025. Primary outcome was anatomic success. Secondary outcomes were visual analog scale (VAS), Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score (AVVQ), and complications. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. Subsequent analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: A total of four RCTs, one cohort study and retrospective cross-sectional study involving 737 patients (380 MOCA patients and 357 RFA patients) were included. The meta-analysis results showed that the RFA group was significantly better than the MOCA group in short term and long term of anatomical success rate [(odds ratio [OR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] (0.20, 0.71), P = 0.003), (OR = 0.17, 95% CI (0.06, 0.45), P = 0.0003)], but patients in the MOCA group had significantly lower perioperative period pain (mean difference [MD] = -4.48, 95% CI (-7.58, -1.37), P = 0.005] and required fewer days to return to normal activities (MD = -0.76, 95% CI, (-0.95, -0.57), P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in minor and major complications [(OR = 0.93, 95% CI (0.66, 1.33), P = 0.70), (OR = 1.30, 95% CI (0.32, 5.28), P = 0.72)] or quality of life scores (MD = -0.45, 95% CI (-2.53 to 1.63), P = 0.67). CONCLUSION: MOCA of GSV incompetence is an effective and safe method. Compared with RFA, it has lower postoperative pain score and faster recovery time. However, the anatomical success rates were significantly lower with MOCA than with RFA. Therefore, long-term follow-up to evaluate the impact on clinical results is required.

Humans