Unplugging the Donut of Drainage
Bringing trabecular meshwork and Schlemm’s canal models of glaucoma up to date with the latest tissue engineering technologies
Malfunction in the trabecular meshwork (TM), leading to blockage of Schlemm’s canal (SC), often leads to a dangerously increased IOP in primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) – and yet we don’t even know why this problem occurs. Although surgical removal of the blockage through trabeculotomy is an option, it’s common for the blockage to reappear down the line and for IOP to jump back up. Glaucoma is already the most common cause of blindness globally and the number of people affected is projected to increase (thanks to our aging population), so we can surely no longer ignore an important question: Why does this donut shaped tissue become dysfunctional for so many people?
It’s true that there have been plenty of attempts to investigate the root cause of this pathological factor in the past with various in vitro and animal models for glaucoma – but nothing gleaned from these studies has been effectively translated into preventing or treating the tissue malfunction.
Put simply, we need to use modern biotechnology to create better tissues in the lab to discover exactly what is going wrong in aqueous humor drainage – and how we can fix it (1).
Unveiling the problem
Our aim, within Lisa J. Hill’s lab at the University of Birmingham, UK, is to create a human 3D model of the primary site of POAG pathology – the blockage at the juxtacanalicular TM layer and SC inner wall, to be precise – and dig into the root cause of TM dysfunction.
The main challenge? As far as drainage systems go, the TM and SC are remarkably complex – from both a biological and mechanical perspective. It is not simply a biochemical issue (which would still not be simple), but a combination of biological, physical, and mechanical properties that affect the bulk function of the tissue.
Donut of drainage
Both the TM and SC are located at the intersection of the iris and the cornea – forming a donut shaped tissue that is supposed to mediate drainage of aqueous humor in the eye. The TM and SC meet at the endothelial membrane, a key site in the TM with three distinct layers – the uveal meshwork, the corneoscleral meshwork, and the juxtacanalicular tissue – that all work to filter and flow aqueous humor into the SC.
One aspect that has boggled my mind – and, at the same time, further inspired our research – is that the TM cells differ in architecture and functionality throughout the tissue layers; indeed, they are highly adaptable and able to alter their characteristics dependent on their physical location; the cells adopt endothelial or phagocytic like behavioral roles in the uveal and corneoscleral meshwork, but the same cells in the juxtacanalicular tissue section take on the role of fibroblast and smooth-muscle cells. It is clear that the surrounding extracellular matrix is pulling the strings and enabling the cells of the TM to become social butterflies, with their amazing plasticity and stem cell-like characteristics.
The cellular variability in TM tissue (described in Donut of Drainage) is yet to be effectively presented when developing TM and POAG models in vitro – I believe this is because there needs to be a shift in focus when researching this tissue. We need to move away from the research question, “How do we make a TM model that replicates human physiology in the lab?” Instead, we must ask, “What piece of the TM are we trying to mimic? What type of TM cells are we creating? And are we producing all the genetic and functional outputs needed to represent the sections we want to research?”
Frankly, the current models used to research this system struggle to encompass the complementary biological and physical attributes that form a functional in vivo tissue. Typically, these models contain one aspect or the other, without ever combining the two to create a wholly biomimetic system. And though every model has advantages and limitations, we need to ensure that any model has the complexity and relevance to effectively answer the research questions we want to answer. A 2D cell model with single cell types on plastic is alien compared with living tissue and so can probably only answer very limited questions. And when looking at animal models, which of course have the necessary 3D architecture and multi-cellular interactions, you cannot guarantee that discoveries will have relevance to human disease. We’re trying to fill this big gap with a human cellular model that mirrors the complexities of living tissue.
On cue
We have established that biophysical cues are extremely potent stimulators of cellular manipulation and response for the development of an effective TM and SC tissue. A key factor that we consider when developing our 3D TM structures is the biomaterial selection for growing the tissue – with biomaterial composition, porosity, nanoscale topographical features and stiffness all being fine-tuned to ensure a functional tissue is developed.
A great deal of research has focused on the biological aspects of TM and SC function. However, these cells are sensitive mechano-transducers, therefore the biophysical stimulus (material stiffness, topographical cues, cell-biomaterial interaction) provided through the biomaterial selection process may have the potential to direct their cellular fate just as much as the biological aspects. And that’s not to say providing biochemical cues isn’t important – but it is not realistic to ignore the huge influence of physical cues for inducing certain scenarios, such as fibrosis. By understanding the unique attributes for stimulating certain cell types, the biomaterial selection process can be used to manipulate the cells into an in vivo state. The end goal is to develop a diseased (fibrotic) tissue that mediates the flow of water going through it – which we can then use to find a treatment to restore optimal fluid flow.
The future is 3D
There are myriad biological and physical factors that work in synchronicity to regulate fluid outflow. To develop the complexity of the TM and SC in the lab requires the adoption of tissue engineering principles to produce both biological and mechanical aspects of the human tissue. This complexity is what has taken our project from solely investigating the TM, to the co-modular culture of both TM and SC that can recreate fluid outflow regulation. The next step is to create POAG models that also assess how optic nerve and retinal ganglion cell death occurs during increased pressure scenarios.
Creating 3D, humanized in vitro models that can replicate the complexity of these tissues in a controlled, reproducible manner would allow thorough investigations into basic mechanisms of the pathological processes as well as facilitate pre-clinical drug testing. As a byproduct of developing more sophisticated models of POAG, with TM and SC endothelial co-culture, we can start to fill gaps within the understanding of fluid flow regulation and pinpoint how physical cues complement the biological outputs of these cells within the fluid outflow pathway. Crucially, it will enable us to start tackling the high levels of POAG by treating the underlying causes rather than just alleviating the symptoms. A deeper understanding of tissue functionality may also help guide us to regenerative capabilities. Wherever we end up, we hope we are able to limit the prevalence and reduce the burden of current eye diseases for patients and healthcare systems.
- HC Lamont et al., “Fundamental Biomaterial Considerations in the Development of a 3D Model Representative of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma,” Bioengineering, 8, 147 (2021). PMID: 34821713.
Hannah C. Lamont is a candidate at the EPSRC-SFI Centre for Doctoral Training in Engineered Tissues for Discovery, Industry and Medicine, University of Birmingham, UK.