Ocular immune homeostasis—mechanisms of precise regulation through coordination of the eye, visual system and beyond: a narrative review

Introduction

The eye is a unique system in which the precise interworking of different tissue types and fluid compartments allows for vision. This system heavily relies on the transparency of tissues such as the cornea and lens and fluid compartments, including the tear film, aqueous, and vitreous, for the successful transmission of light. While the eye has been previously characterized as immune-privileged (1,2), more recent studies have better characterized it as immune quiescent or tolerant (3,4). Immune privilege is characterized by a reduced or modified immune response, and historically was linked to the finding that within the eye, the expected rejection of allografts did not occur (5). This privileged state was thought to relate to a combination of factors, including lack of blood vessels and lymphatic drainage in multiple ocular tissues, high concentrations of immunosuppressive tissue immunomodulators, including both cell-surface molecules and soluble factors, and the activity of regulatory T cells (Tregs) (6).

Additionally, three ocular tissue barriers are characterized: an inner blood-retinal barrier, formed by endothelial cells in the inner layers of the neural retina, an outer blood-retinal barrier, formed by the retinal pigmented epithelial cells, and the blood-aqueous barrier in the ciliary body (7,8). Of these, the inner blood-retinal barrier is thought of as a true barrier, only infiltrated in cases of significant inflammation that breaks down the endothelial tight junctions (9,10). In contrast, the outer blood-retinal barrier is viewed more as a site for retinal immunosurveillance, with the epithelium producing and surrounded by many immunomodulatory mediators (11,12) that may actually promote resolution of inflammation. Similarly, the blood-aqueous barrier is patrolled by leukocytes and is a primary site for leukocyte infiltration preceding retinal inflammation, while the aqueous humor also has multiple immunomodulatory factors (13-15). It is through these multiple gateways that the eye communicates with the immune system as a whole to allow for not just the protection of the eye from inflammation but also for the coordination of response.

This review focuses on the precise regulation of physical barriers, immune cell monitoring and activity, and immunomodulator expression on multiple levels that allow the visual system to maintain homeostasis. Inflammation within the eye in response to injury, disease pathology, or autoimmunity can lead to significant loss of visual acuity (16). It is therefore critical to understand how this inflammation is regulated and controlled within eye tissues, both in normal tissue and disease states. This review aims to examine the various levels of immune regulation and how understanding their precise inter-coordination can lead to improved clinical outcomes. We present this article in accordance with the Narrative Review reporting checklist (available at https://aes.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/aes-2025-1-66/rc).

Methods

A literature review was conducted using PubMed to access published papers. Reviews and meta-analyses were considered in leading to direct publication of new studies. All papers with available English publication were considered, regardless of country of origin. Literature searches occurred from May 2025 to December 2025, with this review focusing on newer publications (within the past 25 years) to highlight advances in the field, although also referencing historical context (Table 1).

Eye resident immune cells

Similar to other tissues, it has been demonstrated that ocular tissues contain resident immune cells. Like the other components of the central nervous system, the retina has microglia that are critical not only for immune response but also for development and homeostasis. These cells are first seen near the optic nerve and in the peripheral retina (17,18) before migrating throughout the retina. They develop through progressive stages with distinct transcriptional and epigenomic expression patterns (19). These microglia are essential for neuronal proliferation, survival, and differentiation within the retina (20,21) and are also necessary for maintaining synaptic integrity and function in the adult retina (22). Retinal microglia are notably limited to the inner retina under physiological conditions; however, in disease pathology and aging, these cells are seen within the outer layers (23-25). In multiple ocular diseases, including glaucoma, hereditary retinal degeneration, and age-related macular degeneration (AMD), it has been shown that microglia play a role in contributing to and advancing disease pathology (26), and it is being researched as to how this may serve as a therapeutic target (27,28). However, recent work has focused on distinguishing the long-lived microglia present in normal retina, which are generally associated with lower expression of inflammatory markers, from those macrophages recruited during injury, to better understand the roles of both in normal and disease states (29). It was found that in disease states, retinal microglia migrated to the subretinal space, underwent transcriptional reprogramming that led to reduced pro-inflammatory expression, and were responsible for the clearance of debris (30-32).

The cornea contains a variety of immune cells, primarily macrophages, as well as Langerhans cells (LCs), mast cells, lymphocytes, and innate lymphoid cells (33,34) that are able to migrate via both lymphatic vessels and capillaries (35,36). Studies have demonstrated the presence of immature antigen-presenting cells (APCs), such as dendritic cells, even in the central cornea (37,38), ready to mature in response to inflammation or pathogens (33). Work has distinguished that LCs are found within the corneal epithelium and are CD11c⁺, while the dendritic cells seen in the stroma are Langerin+ but not LCs (39). It is changes in the concentrations of other types of immune cells in the cornea that are often indicative of pathology (40-43), with multiple diseases linked to an increase in neutrophils, natural killer (NK) cells, mast cells, and/or T cells, including dry eye, keratoconus, ocular Stevens-Johnson syndrome, peripheral ulcerative keratitis (PUK), and corneal transplant rejection (44-48).

The lens, despite having no vasculature or innervation, has been shown to have resident immune cells as well (49,50). It has been shown in other systems that matrix proteins such as fibronectin and tenascin-C promote the migration and adhesion of immune cells (51-54), and in the lens, these proteins are associated with the lens capsule, with fibrillin-2-rich ciliary zonules providing a pathway for immune cell migration into the embryonic lens (50). This same pathway is used to recruit immune cells to the lens surface in response to corneal injury (55). These lens resident immune cells have been observed to be integrated within the lens epithelium across species, including chick, mouse, and human (49). It has been shown in both mock cataract surgery models and in human pediatric lens explants post-cataract surgery that the lens resident immune cells are rapidly activated and recruited to the wound edge (49). These cells have also been shown to be myofibroblast progenitors (56,57), which contribute to inflammatory and fibrotic conditions, including posterior capsule opacification (PCO).

Coordination of immune response between ocular components

It was discovered that injury or loss of homeostasis in one ocular tissue leads to an immune response in other regions of the same eye. A lens-specific conditional N-cadherin knockout leads to embryonic dysmorphogenesis of the lens that results in further postnatal degeneration and opacity formation (58). This degeneration is characterized by immune cells that populate the lens and contribute to fibrosis, but more notably, there is evidence of immune surveillance throughout the eye in response as well (58). There was an increase in immune cells seen in the vitreous, retina, and central cornea in N-cadherin lens knockout eyes compared to wildtype, emphasizing the interplay of ocular tissues and likely coordinated efforts to maintain homeostasis (58). Similarly, in response to corneal debridement, it was shown that immune cells associate with the ciliary zonules and that multiple types of immune cells, including monocytes, macrophages, and neutrophils, use these zonule fibers to migrate to the anterior surface of the lens, with some of these cells crossing the lens capsule (55). This remains true in a mouse debridement wound model, where recurrent erosions in the cornea result in recruitment of immune cells back to the anterior surface of the lens even after healing of the initial injury (59).

The eye also has a unique phenomenon of binocular coordination of inflammation. It has been noted for centuries that surgical or penetrating injury in one eye can lead to the development of inflammation in the contralateral eye, a condition known as sympathetic ophthalmia (60,61). This is characterized by a cellular immune response, primarily mediated by T-cells, and including, in addition to lymphocytes, epithelioid cells and giant cells (62). Additionally, both pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), are upregulated in contralateral eyes in response to injury (63). Interestingly, changes observed in both the inciting eye and its fellow are similar, with early infiltration of CD4 + helper/inducer T cells followed by an infiltration of CD8 + suppressor/cytotoxic T cells, despite the fact that the timeframe of sympathetic ophthalmia varies greatly (64,65). While the pathogenesis of sympathetic ophthalmia is not well understood, ocular antigen interphotoreceptor retinoid-binding antigen (IRBP) and S antigen are able to produce a similar disease phenotype in monkeys, and it appears to be linked to uveal antigen exposure to the lymphatic system (60,66,67). Additionally, the disease process bears a striking similarity to Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada syndrome, with both associated with a granulomatous panuveitis and multiple pockets of subretinal fluid, which may prove an avenue to better understand this rare disease. Research into molecular pathways involved has led to therapies specifically targeting cytokines involved in leukocyte recruitment, including chemokine ligand 2 (CCL2), and C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 12 (CXCL12) (68,69).

This phenomenon has also been seen in response to infection, with recent work demonstrating that infectious keratitis leads to not only increased immune cells in the affected eye, but a subclinical immune response in the contralateral eye (70). In the cornea, this immune response seems to be linked to additional bilateral changes to sensory nerves in response to viral infection, as well as mechanical injury (9,71,72), suggesting a connection between the immune system and nervous system that may play a role in immune regulation.

In surgical settings, it has been seen that surgery in one eye can influence the inflammatory milieu of the contralateral eye. In multiple studies, the aqueous humor was analyzed in both eyes prior to and after cataract surgery, and there was a significant increase in monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 (MCP-1) in the second eye following surgery in the fellow eye (73,74). MCP-1, a pain-related inflammatory cytokine, controls recruitment of leukocytes in inflammation and tissue injury (75). Similarly, substance P is also found to be elevated in second surgical eyes in some conditions, such as diabetes, a molecule that is known to be protective in ocular inflammation, wound healing, and tissue homeostasis (74,76). Thus, in considering immune response in the eye, one must remember that the eye is a tightly coordinated system where different tissues interact to promote global homeostasis to allow for vision.

Ocular immune dysregulation in injury and disease

In recent work, there has been an emphasis on the understanding of how immune cells and their environments change in response to disease pathologies of the eye. In multiple vascular diseases of the eye, the retina demonstrates changes in immune surveillance. In retinopathy of prematurity, oxygen deprivation leads to activation of retinal microglia and correlates with the development of neovascularization (77,78). In AMD, it has been reported that activated microglia migrate to the outer layers and contribute to this degenerative disease (26,78). Moreover, it is seen that reactive microglia accumulate on retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) cells both within and on top of drusen, and it is thought that persistent inflammation causes repetitive injury to the RPE and photoreceptors (26,79). This damage leads to a continued cascade of immune recruitment and response through the release of retinal antibodies and a form of autoimmunity (80-83). Diabetic retinopathy has also been associated with inflammation (84,85), with activation and proliferation of microglia as well as their migration and infiltration of the outer retinal layers (78,86). Insights from retinal ischemia reperfusion injury demonstrate that both resident and peripheral immune cells regulate the immune response, with resident microglia, Muller cells, and astrocytes undergoing morphological change and producing inflammatory mediators that then recruit neutrophils, monocytes, and lymphocytes (87-89). This is not simply a cellular response, but rather part of a complex system that involves pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), the complement system, and inflammasomes and combines innate and adaptive immunity (88). Injury also results in transcriptional changes in subretinal microglia, including downregulation of homeostatic genes and upregulation of neurodegeneration-linked genes, many of which have been implicated in both eye and CNS diseases (30,90-95).

In the setting of the lens, it has been shown that following mock cataract surgery, there is induction of CD83, an immunoglobulin typically expressed on the surface of activated APCs, as well as S100A4, a mediator of macrophage recruitment and chemotaxis, and mediators of immune response such as Toll-like receptor 4 and interferon (IFN) γ receptor 1 (96-100). Other studies demonstrate that following cataract surgery, there is upregulation of known innate inflammatory mediators, including CXCL1 (3866-fold), S100a9, CSF3/G-CSF, and CCL2 within 24 hours that likely promote the observed infiltration of neutrophils and macrophages (101).

In corneal debridement injuries, immune cells are seen both at the leading edge of the epithelial wound and in the area of the open wound, with primarily neutrophils and, to a lesser extent, monocyte-macrophages seen in the stroma (102). While these cells generally leave following wound closure, in corneal erosions that follow primary wound closure, there is again recruitment of immune cells to areas of the stroma underlying the denuded corneal basement membrane, which includes macrophages, neutrophils, as well as a small population of CD4⁺ T cells (59,102). Similar to other ocular tissues, wounding of the corneal epithelium resulted in upregulation of cytokines that promote immune response (103), including interleukin (IL)-1β, CCL2, CCL6, CXCL1, and CXCL16 that serve as chemoattractants (59,104-106). Additionally, PUK is known to be an immune-mediated keratopathy, associated with increased proinflammatory cells in the cornea, including neutrophils, mast cells, and eosinophils (45) but also antibodies directed against the cornea (107,108).

A phenomenon known as anterior chamber-associated immune deviation (ACAID) was defined in the cornea to explain the immune response to this avascular tissue. In early work by Kaplan and Streilein, it was first revealed that the anterior chamber did, in fact, respond to inoculation of antigen, resulting in a systemic immune response (109-113). ACAID is associated with the production of inflammatory cytokines, recruitment of monocytes to the anterior chamber, disbursement of ocular APCs expressing F4/80 and CD11b molecules to the thymus and spleen, and induction of Tregs (114-119). Interestingly, this response appears to be a form of mild inflammation that seems to prime the immune system to protect against a future, more damaging immune response (119-121). Preliminary work highlights a possible role for this mechanism in suppressing autoimmune uveitis (122). Thus, an understanding of the regulation and response of the immune surveillance systems in the eye is critical to understanding disease pathology and healing.

Inflammation, autoimmunity and uveitis

One of the best studied inflammatory responses in the eye is autoimmune uveitis. It is a diverse collection of intraocular inflammatory diseases of the uvea that also involves other regions of the eye and is often recurrent in nature. It is a leading cause of preventable blindness and is generally classified based on the primary anatomical site of inflammation—anterior, intermediate, posterior, or all three (123-125). Uveitis is divided into two broad categories, infectious and non-infectious, and is autoimmune in nature, and in a significant proportion of cases is related to a systemic autoimmune disorder (126). In developed countries, uveitis related to autoimmune disease is much more common, while infectious uveitis is generally more frequent in the developing world (127-129). The autoimmune nature of uveitis is supported by multiple factors, including genetic association with certain human leukocyte antigen (HLA), immunological response to ocular proteins such as retinal arrestin, interphotoreceptor retinoid-binding protein, recoverin, or uveal melanin, and the critical involvement of T-cells in the pathogenesis of the disease (130,131). However, work has demonstrated that depending on the subtype of uveitis, the type of inflammatory response can vary, from being more reliant on innate immunity as is seen in endophthalmitis, to being more associated with an adaptive immune response as is seen in idiopathic granulomatous uveitis (132-134).

Much of our understanding of uveitis comes from animal models, with experimental autoimmune uveitis (EAU) being the most explored. From these, we have learned that activated T cells responding to retinal antigens mediate EAU in animals, which corresponds to the assumption that T cells play a significant role in human uveitis as well (130). T-cell targeting therapies such as mycophenolic acid and cyclosporine that work through targeting IL-2, which is necessary to T cell activation and function, have shown efficacy in human uveitis treatment (135,136). In EAU models, there is a strong upregulation of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II expression in the retina and this induction significantly correlates with disease severity (137). In animal models, those with higher affinity or prevalence of retinal antigen-specific T cells were predisposed to develop uveitis, while Tregs can help decrease the likelihood or severity of EAU and may suppress other T cells (130,138-141). It has been shown that CD4⁺ T cells are necessary for the development of EAU, while CD8⁺ T cells are not and, in fact, may play more of a regulatory role (142-145). One study suggests the peripheral activation of autoreactive CD4⁺ T cells is critical for the induction of disease, and these cells are seen to be recruited and peak earlier in the course of uveitis (146,147). CD8⁺ T cell numbers do increase in models of experimental uveitis, and are often found to reside in tissues as memory cells and help prime the response to repeat infection or stimulus (143,148,149). It is seen that CD8⁺ cells mostly have characteristics of effector memory cells during initial inflammation, while later there is increased expression of the co-inhibitory receptor PD-1, which is generally associated with T cell exhaustion (150,151).

Roles for both Th1 effector cells, which predominantly produce IFNγ, and Th17 effector cells, which produce IL-17, in the pathogenesis of uveitis have been suggested, and there is evidence of both responses in human uveitis (152-156). These T cells then secrete cytokines and chemokines that recruit other leukocytes, with Th17 generally recruiting neutrophils whereas Th1 recruits monocytes, which then cause tissue damage (131,153). The suppression of these other leukocytes, specifically in models of removal of macrophages or suppression of myeloid activation, can decrease the severity of EAU (157-161). IFNγ-mediated macrophage activation that depends on TNF-α and functional TNFR1 results in high levels of nitric oxide, TNF-α, and IL-6, but ablation of IFNγ exacerbates clinical EAU and leads to accumulation of granulocytes (129,150,162). In contrast, targeting IL-17 markedly reduces inflammation in EAU and moreover, the transfer of Th17 cells is sufficient to penetrate the retinal barrier and trigger the onset of EAU (153). Other cytokines produced by Th17 cells, such as IL-21, may also further exacerbate inflammation; however, the Th17 response also plays a role in immunoregulation through the production of IL-10, IL-24, and TGF-β (163-167). Thus, there is a balance of inflammation and immune suppression that is regulated by Th17 cells.

Further proof of this balance of inflammation and immunoregulation has recently been highlighted in the lens. While uveitis is a known cause of tissue injury within the eye and clinically linked to cataract complications, PCO, glaucoma, macular edema, and retinal detachment, only recent work has looked at the impact of uveitis on the lens itself (168-170). A mouse model of EAU demonstrates that immune cells, including T cells, macrophages and Ly6G/Ly6C⁺ cells, associate with the lens surface, integrate within the lens capsule and are capable of then infiltrating the lens itself (171). Interestingly, immune cells were found to continue to associate with the lens capsule surface even as EAU models entered the phase of immune resolution (172). While certain cells, including CD11b⁺ myeloid cells and CD4⁺ T cells, were seen to persist along the lens capsule surface from the period of active inflammation through to the end of the resolution phase, the numbers of Tregs significantly increased through the resolution of active inflammation (172). Additionally, macrophages associated with the lens capsule during active inflammation and resolution had immunoregulatory properties and expressed IL-10, an anti-inflammatory cytokine (172).

It is not only those cells recruited to the eye that contribute to uveitis pathology or its resolution, however. Pharmacological depletion of microglia has been shown to prevent the breakdown of the blood retinal barrier, suppress the infiltration of inflammatory cells into the retina, and improve visual outcomes in EAU models and, similarly, inactivation of microglia also improves retinal integrity and clinical appearance (173-175). The roles of microglia, however, are diverse, and recent focus has capitalized on understanding what promotes the change of retinal microglia from the proinflammatory M1 subtype to the anti-inflammatory M2 subtype (137,176-178). It remains a critical focus to understand the balance between inflammation and immune regulation in the pathogenesis of autoimmunity.

While animal models are helpful in understanding disease pathology in vivo, they do have clinical limitations. First lies in the fact that uveitis is a heterogeneous disease pathology in its clinical severity and duration, which is difficult to replicate in an inducible system (179). Additionally, certain models, especially those of anterior uveitis, offer a very limited timeframe of study to investigate disease mechanisms or treatments (180,181). Posterior uveitis is also limited by a lack of knowledge of the autoantigens involved. In addition, the progression and severity of the disease vary depending on the species, strain and dosage amount of autoantigens used by each model, making generalized conclusions difficult (142,182). Newer models involving transgenic mice that replicate a “spontaneous” form of uveitis may be useful for translational purposes (183-186).

The influence of microbiomes on ocular immune response

There has been recent focus on the importance of the microbiota associated with skin and mucosal surfaces in the regulation of global immune stimulation and response (187,188). While there are multiple forms of protection from colonization of the ocular surface, including mechanical forces such as blinking, as well as chemical deterrents such as the lysozyme found within tears, the existence of ocular surface microorganisms has been known for decades (189,190). Multiple methods have been used to characterize the normal ocular surface microbiome, although there is some debate between different studies. Using traditional methods of culturing, Gram-positive bacteria are generally the most common found (191,192). Sequencing studies generally agree on the types of Gram-positive bacteria found, but also include some Gram-negative species (193-196). Additional studies have also identified fungal elements (197,198). The organisms of the microbiota are a source for peptidoglycans that prime neutrophils and also play a role in regulating the level of secretory IgA at the ocular surface, which neutralizes toxins, viruses, and bacteria, promotes production of IL-10, and affects maturation of dendritic cells (199-205).

Even more notable are the changes in the ocular microbiome in the setting of disease. In general, most disease states are noted to be associated with a reduction in Gram-positive organisms and an increase in Gram-negative organisms (206,207). Additionally, in considering the microbiome, there are two types of diversity: α-diversity, which is the diversity of organisms within a community, and β-diversity, which is the diversity between communities (208-210). A healthy microbiome is generally characterized by a diverse environment, and it has been noted that in ocular disease states, there is a decrease in α-diversity (206,207).

Many studies have demonstrated that ocular disease states, including diabetes, conjunctivitis, and certain autoimmune diseases, are associated with alterations in ocular surface microbiota (211-215). Additionally, some studies suggest that the ocular microbiome plays a role in ocular homeostasis and changes may lead to increased risk of eye infection (216,217). In dry eye disease, multiple studies have shown a higher likelihood of bacterial culture positivity in affected eyes (190,218-220). In Sjogren syndrome, an autoimmune condition primarily associated with dry mucosa, including the eye, there is a decrease in lactoferrin and lysozyme, both molecules that generally combat bacterial growth, while there is an increase in Staph aureus and immune cell infiltrate (221-223). In meibomian gland disease (MGD), one of the major causes of evaporative dry eye disease, it has been shown that with increasing disease severity, there are increases in certain species of bacteria as well (224-226).

In addition to the ocular surface, the gut microbiome is increasingly understood to play a role in ocular inflammation. Interestingly, studies in a uveitis model revealed the presence of activated T cells in the gut prior to their localization to the retina (227,228). In these same models, it was noted that uveitis models are associated with increased populations of Th17 cells in the intestinal lining, and that antibiotic treatment significantly decreases the numbers of these cells (228-230). Additionally, studies with both antibiotic-treated and germ-free mice reveal that in the absence or suppression of microbiota, there was a significant reduction in activated T cells and disease attenuation (188,227,229,231,232). In some studies, it appears as though short-term antibiotics can inhibit EAU development, especially if started prior to induction of uveitis, while in others, there was increased leukocyte trafficking from the intestine to the eye during EAU (231-234). Recent studies demonstrate that the transfer of the gut microbiome from animals with diseases such as Behcet’s and Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease, which are both characterized by multiorgan inflammation, including uveitis, exacerbates disease severity in recipient EAU mice (235,236).

While a primary focus on the role of the microbiome in ocular disease has focused on uveitis models, other disease pathologies also have associations. Some studies demonstrate that changes to the gut microbiome can also modulate dry eye disease. In antibiotic-treated and germ-free mice, the ocular surface responded worse to drying stress conditions, which was associated with lymphocyte infiltration of the lacrimal gland, increased inflammatory cytokines, and impaired barrier function of the cornea (52,215,237). For those with AMD, it has been noted that there are differences in microbial populations in the intestinal, oral, nasal, and pharyngeal mucosa compared to those without the disease (238-241). Additionally, preliminary studies suggest several intraocular bacteria are associated specifically with AMD and significantly enriched in soft drusen (242,243). Notably, the only current therapy with efficacy in slowing the progression of AMD is a combination of antioxidants (244,245). Recent work has also tied infection of Helicobacter pylori to the development of open-angle glaucoma (246-248). Similar to AMD, patients with open-angle glaucoma have distinct gut microbiome compositions compared to healthy people, and a toxin produced by the gut microbiome, trimethylamine, has been found specifically in the aqueous humor of patients with glaucoma (249-251). This work remains preliminary, but it is likely that further understanding of the connection between ocular disease pathogenesis and the microbiome will help overall understanding.

Immunomodulation as a therapeutic avenue

In light of recent work on the microbiome, there has been a pursuit of whether modulation of the gut microbiome will impact disease pathology and if this may prove an avenue for treatment. A probiotic mixture was tested for possible efficacy in immune-mediated eye diseases and did have a therapeutic effect on autoimmune uveitis and dry eye, especially in combination with pretreatment with antibiotics (234,252-254). Another avenue of approach is through the use of bioactive microbial metabolites, such as short-chain fatty acids, which are associated with attenuation of inflammation (255). One of these, propionic acid, has shown success in reducing the severity of disease in an EAU model and was associated with Treg induction, although only in certain strains (233). There are also some limited studies that direct application of certain bacteria to the tear film can improve dry eye symptoms (256). Another avenue of future research is investigating a potential role for bacteriophages in modulating the microbiome, something that is currently being studied as a treatment method for ocular infections (257-259). Overall, while this is an emerging area of investigation, studies are still limited in showing efficacy.

Traditionally, therapies for uveitis have focused on immunosuppression, either broad-spectrum or targeted. Often, the progression is topical and/or systemic treatment with oral or intravenous corticosteroids, systemic immunomodulators (i.e., T-cell inhibitors or antimetabolites), and finally, biologics. However, given the high risk of side effects and complications that come with long-term corticosteroid use, there has been movement to better target aspects of inflammation to reduce steroid dependence (260). Among these immunomodulators are T cell-targeted therapies such as rapamycin and cyclosporine, anti-TNF and IFN-α treatments, and newer studies that target the IL-2 receptor (261-264). However, there are many new avenues to consider. One of these is to promote and enhance Treg function by boosting tolerance, something that has been trialed in HLA-DR3 transgenic mice and has shown promise in controlling EAU (265-267). Additionally, neutralization of IL-17 by monoclonal antibodies has been shown to stop EAU in mouse models and there are current clinical trials focused on taking advantage of this mechanism, although results are mixed (130,153,268,269). Multiple therapies aimed at blocking Th1, Th17, or both responses are currently being used as treatment for subtypes of uveitis. These include ustekinumab, which blocks both Th1 and Th17, targeting IL-12 and IL-23, sarilumab, which inhibits Th17 differentiation, and anakinra and canakinumab, which target IL-1 or its receptor (270-272). Additionally, there has been interest in developing topical ocular immunosuppressives, using inflammation antagonists such as the neuropeptide, alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone (α-MSH) (273). In EAU models, α-MSH is capable of reducing inflammation, primarily by antagonizing nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), ubiquitination of IFNγ, inducing Treg cells, and promoting suppressor macrophages (274-277). The next step will be to see if these treatments solely have efficacy in experimental models or if they may have application in human disease.

Beyond these approaches, one could also consider inhibiting the recruitment and migration of immune cells by focusing on adhesion molecules and chemokine/cytokine receptors. Studies have shown that blocking integrins α4β1 or αLβ2, intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), chemokine receptors (CCRs; CXCR3 and CXCR5), or the hyaluronan receptor CD44, osteopontin, and matrix metalloproteinases can all inhibit EAU (278-282). Recent work has also demonstrated that the interaction of CD47, also known as integrin-associated protein (IAP), with signal regulatory protein alpha (SIRPα) is required for efficient induction of T cell-mediated inflammation (267). Additionally, deficiency of CD47 protects from autoimmune uveitis, which may also provide a target for future therapies (283,284). Some of these therapies already have approval for use in other conditions; however, there are concerns about off-target effects.

Other immune cell-mediated pathologies also reveal pathways for therapeutic intervention. CCR7 is known to play a role in immune cell trafficking, playing a pivotal role in allorecognition in corneal transplantation but also in promoting Treg suppressor function (285-287). CCR7 antagonists have shown efficacy in ocular allergy and may be beneficial in other ocular conditions (288,289). Other systems have investigated the use of hydrogels that integrate hyaluronic acid, a natural component of tears with known wound healing effects, for use in corneal wound healing (290-292). These hydrogels not only have the ability to be absorbed by the corneal stroma but also have anti-inflammatory effects, including a reduced recruitment of immune cells to the site of injury (292). It is possible that ongoing clinical trials will reveal even further applications for these in inflammatory and injury conditions.

Extreme cases may also benefit from aggressive intervention as well. CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR T cells) are T cells that have been engineered to recognize CD19 and eliminate all B cells in a patient (293). While typically thought of in the context of lymphoma, its use is being expanded to other autoimmune disorders such as systemic lupus erythematosus, where it has led to drug-free remission (294,295). Similarly, rituximab, which targets CD20 on B cells, has been shown to have efficacy in treating ocular cicatricial pemphigoid and other subtypes of uveitis (296-299). Thus, there is a potential opportunity to capitalize on this technology in uveitis and to highlight the role of B cells in its pathology.

Strengths and limitations

This review focuses on the interconnection of the visual system and immune system, which is unique compared to other reviews on the subject. Due to the evolving nature of the field, certain topics relied more heavily on individual studies. It is possible that relevant articles may have been missed in the literature search. A formal quality assessment of the included articles was not performed.

Conclusions

The eye has evolved significantly from its previous understanding as an immune-privileged site. There are now multiple insights into the role of the resident and adaptive immune systems in inflammation, disease pathology, and tissue recovery and regulation. Here, we demonstrate that there are multiple levels of regulation within the eye, the bilateral visual system, and the immune system as a whole that are necessary to consider when investigating disease pathology and treatment. Further research that investigates how the eye is a coordinate system in how it regulates immune response, animal models that better replicate clinical pathology and treatment avenues that leverage an understanding of immunoregulation are all essential for better clinical outcomes.

Acknowledgments

None.

Footnote

Provenance and Peer Review: This article was commissioned by the Guest Editor (Michael Wormstone) for the series “Biological Mechanisms of the Eye” published in Annals of Eye Science. The article has undergone external peer review.

Reporting Checklist: The authors have completed the Narrative Review reporting checklist. Available at https://aes.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/aes-2025-1-66/rc

Peer Review File: Available at https://aes.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/aes-2025-1-66/prf

Funding: This study was supported by National Eye Institute, NIH (R01 grant to A.S.M.: EY021784).

Conflicts of Interest: Both authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://aes.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/aes-2025-1-66/coif). The series “Biological Mechanisms of the Eye” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. A.S.M. received funding from National Eye Institute, NIH (R01 grant: EY021784). The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

References

1. Keino H, Horie S, Sugita S. Immune Privilege and Eye-Derived T-Regulatory Cells. J Immunol Res 2018;2018:1679197. [Crossref] [PubMed]
2. Mölzer C, Heissigerova J, Wilson HM, et al. Immune Privilege: The Microbiome and Uveitis. Front Immunol 2020;11:608377. [Crossref] [PubMed]
3. Knickelbein JE, Buela KA, Hendricks RL. Antigen-presenting cells are stratified within normal human corneas and are rapidly mobilized during ex vivo viral infection. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2014;55:1118-23. [Crossref] [PubMed]
4. Shechter R, London A, Schwartz M. Orchestrated leukocyte recruitment to immune-privileged sites: absolute barriers versus educational gates. Nat Rev Immunol 2013;13:206-18. [Crossref] [PubMed]
5. MEDAWAR PB. Immunological tolerance. Science 1961;133:303-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
6. Gregerson DS, Torseth JW, McPherson SW, et al. Retinal expression of a neo-self antigen, beta-galactosidase, is not tolerogenic and creates a target for autoimmune uveoretinitis. J Immunol 1999;163:1073-80.
7. Streilein JW. Ocular immune privilege: therapeutic opportunities from an experiment of nature. Nat Rev Immunol 2003;3:879-89. [Crossref] [PubMed]
8. Kaur C, Foulds WS, Ling EA. Blood-retinal barrier in hypoxic ischaemic conditions: basic concepts, clinical features and management. Prog Retin Eye Res 2008;27:622-47. [Crossref] [PubMed]
9. Luna JD, Chan CC, Derevjanik NL, et al. Blood-retinal barrier (BRB) breakdown in experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis: comparison with vascular endothelial growth factor, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and interleukin-1beta-mediated breakdown. J Neurosci Res 1997;49:268-80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
10. Kerr EC, Copland DA, Dick AD, et al. The dynamics of leukocyte infiltration in experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis. Prog Retin Eye Res 2008;27:527-35. [Crossref] [PubMed]
11. Sugita S. Role of ocular pigment epithelial cells in immune privilege. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 2009;57:263-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
12. Sugita S, Futagami Y, Smith SB, et al. Retinal and ciliary body pigment epithelium suppress activation of T lymphocytes via transforming growth factor beta. Exp Eye Res 2006;83:1459-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
13. Joly S, Francke M, Ulbricht E, et al. Cooperative phagocytes: resident microglia and bone marrow immigrants remove dead photoreceptors in retinal lesions. Am J Pathol 2009;174:2310-23. [Crossref] [PubMed]
14. Prendergast RA, Iliff CE, Coskuncan NM, et al. T cell traffic and the inflammatory response in experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1998;39:754-62.
15. Taylor AW, Streilein JW, Cousins SW. Immunoreactive vasoactive intestinal peptide contributes to the immunosuppressive activity of normal aqueous humor. J Immunol 1994;153:1080-6.
16. Stepp MA, Menko AS. Immune responses to injury and their links to eye disease. Transl Res 2021;236:52-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
17. Provis JM, Diaz CM, Penfold PL. Microglia in human retina: a heterogeneous population with distinct ontogenies. Perspect Dev Neurobiol 1996;3:213-22.
18. Santos AM, Calvente R, Tassi M, et al. Embryonic and postnatal development of microglial cells in the mouse retina. J Comp Neurol 2008;506:224-39. [Crossref] [PubMed]
19. Matcovitch-Natan O, Winter DR, Giladi A, et al. Microglia development follows a stepwise program to regulate brain homeostasis. Science 2016;353:aad8670. [Crossref] [PubMed]
20. Ferrer-Martín RM, Martín-Oliva D, Sierra-Martín A, et al. Microglial Activation Promotes Cell Survival in Organotypic Cultures of Postnatal Mouse Retinal Explants. PLoS One 2015;10:e0135238. [Crossref] [PubMed]
21. Huang T, Cui J, Li L, et al. The role of microglia in the neurogenesis of zebrafish retina. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2012;421:214-20. [Crossref] [PubMed]
22. Wang X, Zhao L, Zhang J, et al. Requirement for Microglia for the Maintenance of Synaptic Function and Integrity in the Mature Retina. J Neurosci 2016;36:2827-42. [Crossref] [PubMed]
23. Zhao L, Zabel MK, Wang X, et al. Microglial phagocytosis of living photoreceptors contributes to inherited retinal degeneration. EMBO Mol Med 2015;7:1179-97. [Crossref] [PubMed]
24. Xu H, Chen M, Mayer EJ, et al. Turnover of resident retinal microglia in the normal adult mouse. Glia 2007;55:1189-98. [Crossref] [PubMed]
25. Indaram M, Ma W, Zhao L, et al. 7-Ketocholesterol increases retinal microglial migration, activation, and angiogenicity: a potential pathogenic mechanism underlying age-related macular degeneration. Sci Rep 2015;5:9144. [Crossref] [PubMed]
26. Silverman SM, Wong WT. Microglia in the Retina: Roles in Development, Maturity, and Disease. Annu Rev Vis Sci 2018;4:45-77. [Crossref] [PubMed]
27. Karlstetter M, Scholz R, Rutar M, et al. Retinal microglia: just bystander or target for therapy? Prog Retin Eye Res 2015;45:30-57. [Crossref] [PubMed]
28. Peña-Altamira E, Petralla S, Massenzio F, et al. Nutritional and Pharmacological Strategies to Regulate Microglial Polarization in Cognitive Aging and Alzheimer's Disease. Front Aging Neurosci 2017;9:175. [Crossref] [PubMed]
29. O'Koren EG, Mathew R, Saban DR. Fate mapping reveals that microglia and recruited monocyte-derived macrophages are definitively distinguishable by phenotype in the retina. Sci Rep 2016;6:20636. [Crossref] [PubMed]
30. O'Koren EG, Yu C, Klingeborn M, et al. Microglial Function Is Distinct in Different Anatomical Locations during Retinal Homeostasis and Degeneration. Immunity 2019;50:723-737.e7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
31. Ma W, Zhang Y, Gao C, et al. Monocyte infiltration and proliferation reestablish myeloid cell homeostasis in the mouse retina following retinal pigment epithelial cell injury. Sci Rep 2017;7:8433. [Crossref] [PubMed]
32. Yu C, Roubeix C, Sennlaub F, et al. Microglia versus Monocytes: Distinct Roles in Degenerative Diseases of the Retina. Trends Neurosci 2020;43:433-49. [Crossref] [PubMed]
33. Liu J, Li Z. Resident Innate Immune Cells in the Cornea. Front Immunol 2021;12:620284. [Crossref] [PubMed]
34. Hori J, Yamaguchi T, Keino H, et al. Immune privilege in corneal transplantation. Prog Retin Eye Res 2019;72:100758. [Crossref] [PubMed]
35. Perez VL. Visualization of Immune Responses in the Cornea. Cornea 2017;36:S5-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
36. Galletti JG, Guzmán M, Giordano MN. Mucosal immune tolerance at the ocular surface in health and disease. Immunology 2017;150:397-407. [Crossref] [PubMed]
37. D'Souza S, Shetty R, Sethu S. Understanding the immunology of the ocular surface and its relevance to clinical practice. Indian J Ophthalmol 2025;73:516-20. [Crossref] [PubMed]
38. Hamrah P, Liu Y, Zhang Q, et al. The corneal stroma is endowed with a significant number of resident dendritic cells. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:581-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
39. Hattori T, Chauhan SK, Lee H, et al. Characterization of Langerin-expressing dendritic cell subsets in the normal cornea. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52:4598-604. [Crossref] [PubMed]
40. Lambiase A, Micera A, Mantelli F, et al. T-helper 17 lymphocytes in ocular cicatricial pemphigoid. Mol Vis 2009;15:1449-55.
41. Khamar P, Nair AP, Shetty R, et al. Dysregulated Tear Fluid Nociception-Associated Factors, Corneal Dendritic Cell Density, and Vitamin D Levels in Evaporative Dry Eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2019;60:2532-42. [Crossref] [PubMed]
42. Reyes JL, Vannan DT, Eksteen B, et al. Innate and Adaptive Cell Populations Driving Inflammation in Dry Eye Disease. Mediators Inflamm 2018;2018:2532314. [Crossref] [PubMed]
43. D'Souza S, Nair AP, Sahu GR, et al. Keratoconus patients exhibit a distinct ocular surface immune cell and inflammatory profile. Sci Rep 2021;11:20891. [Crossref] [PubMed]
44. D'Souza S, Nair AP, Ashok N, et al. Elevated neutrophils and reduced NK cells are associated with altered tear molecular signatures and clinical sequelae of chronic ocular Stevens-Johnson syndrome. Ocul Surf 2024;34:9-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
45. Gomes BF, Santhiago MR. Biology of peripheral ulcerative keratitis. Exp Eye Res 2021;204:108458. [Crossref] [PubMed]
46. Niederkorn JY. Immune mechanisms of corneal allograft rejection. Curr Eye Res 2007;32:1005-16. [Crossref] [PubMed]
47. Celik T. Assessment of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Patients with Dry Eye Disease. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2018;26:1219-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
48. Nishtala K, Pahuja N, Shetty R, Nuijts RM, Ghosh A. Tear biomarkers for keratoconus. Eye Vis (Lond) 2016;3:19. [Crossref] [PubMed]
49. Menko AS, DeDreu J, Logan CM, et al. Resident immune cells of the avascular lens: Mediators of the injury and fibrotic response of the lens. FASEB J 2021;35:e21341. [Crossref] [PubMed]
50. DeDreu J, Le PM, Menko AS. The ciliary zonules provide a pathway for immune cells to populate the avascular lens during eye development. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 2022;247:2251-73. [Crossref] [PubMed]
51. Clark RA, Erickson HP, Springer TA. Tenascin supports lymphocyte rolling. J Cell Biol 1997;137:755-65. [Crossref] [PubMed]
52. Abbadi D, Laroumanie F, Bizou M, et al. Local production of tenascin-C acts as a trigger for monocyte/macrophage recruitment that provokes cardiac dysfunction. Cardiovasc Res 2018;114:123-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
53. Digiacomo G, Tusa I, Bacci M, et al. Fibronectin induces macrophage migration through a SFK-FAK/CSF-1R pathway. Cell Adh Migr 2017;11:327-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
54. Coito AJ, de Sousa M, Kupiec-Weglinski JW. Fibronectin in immune responses in organ transplant recipients. Dev Immunol 2000;7:239-48. [Crossref] [PubMed]
55. DeDreu J, Bowen CJ, Logan CM, et al. An immune response to the avascular lens following wounding of the cornea involves ciliary zonule fibrils. FASEB J 2020;34:9316-36. [Crossref] [PubMed]
56. Walker JL, Zhai N, Zhang L, et al. Unique precursors for the mesenchymal cells involved in injury response and fibrosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010;107:13730-5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
57. Walker JL, Bleaken BM, Romisher AR, et al. In wound repair vimentin mediates the transition of mesenchymal leader cells to a myofibroblast phenotype. Mol Biol Cell 2018;29:1555-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
58. Logan CM, Bowen CJ, Menko AS. Induction of Immune Surveillance of the Dysmorphogenic Lens. Sci Rep 2017;7:16235. [Crossref] [PubMed]
59. Le PM, Pal-Ghosh S, Stepp MA, et al. Shared Phenotypes of Immune Cells Recruited to the Cornea and the Surface of the Lens in Response to Formation of Corneal Erosions. Am J Pathol 2025;195:960-81. [Crossref] [PubMed]
60. Parchand S, Agrawal D, Ayyadurai N, et al. Sympathetic ophthalmia: A comprehensive update. Indian J Ophthalmol 2022;70:1931-44. [Crossref] [PubMed]
61. Albert DM, Diaz-Rohena R. A historical review of sympathetic ophthalmia and its epidemiology. Surv Ophthalmol 1989;34:1-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
62. Rao NA, Xu S, Font RL. Sympathetic ophthalmia. An immunohistochemical study of epithelioid and giant cells. Ophthalmology 1985;92:1660-2.
63. Cabrera-Maqueda JM, Boia R, Lucas-Ruiz F, et al. Neuroinflammation and gliosis in the injured and contralateral retinas after unilateral optic nerve crush. Exp Eye Res 2023;235:109627. [Crossref] [PubMed]
64. Tyagi M, Agarwal K, Reddy Pappuru RR, et al. Sympathetic Ophthalmia after Vitreoretinal Surgeries: Incidence, Clinical Presentations and Outcomes of a Rare Disease. Semin Ophthalmol 2019;34:157-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
65. Jakobiec FA, Marboe CC, Knowles DM 2nd, et al. Human sympathetic ophthalmia. An analysis of the inflammatory infiltrate by hybridoma-monoclonal antibodies, immunochemistry, and correlative electron microscopy. Ophthalmology 1983;90:76-95.
66. Rao NA, Robin J, Hartmann D, et al. The role of the penetrating wound in the development of sympathetic ophthalmia experimental observations. Arch Ophthalmol 1983;101:102-4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
67. Rao NA, Wong VG. Aetiology of sympathetic ophthalmitis. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K 1962;1981:357-60.
68. Abu El-Asrar AM, Struyf S, Van den Broeck C, et al. Expression of chemokines and gelatinase B in sympathetic ophthalmia. Eye (Lond) 2007;21:649-57. [Crossref] [PubMed]
69. Chu XK, Chan CC. Sympathetic ophthalmia: to the twenty-first century and beyond. J Ophthalmic Inflamm Infect 2013;3:49. [Crossref] [PubMed]
70. Cruzat A, Schrems WA, Schrems-Hoesl LM, et al. Contralateral Clinically Unaffected Eyes of Patients With Unilateral Infectious Keratitis Demonstrate a Sympathetic Immune Response. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2015;56:6612-20. [Crossref] [PubMed]
71. Hamrah P, Cruzat A, Dastjerdi MH, et al. Corneal sensation and subbasal nerve alterations in patients with herpes simplex keratitis: an in vivo confocal microscopy study. Ophthalmology 2010;117:1930-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
72. Hamrah P, Cruzat A, Dastjerdi MH, et al. Unilateral herpes zoster ophthalmicus results in bilateral corneal nerve alteration: an in vivo confocal microscopy study. Ophthalmology 2013;120:40-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
73. Zhu XJ, Wolff D, Zhang KK, et al. Molecular Inflammation in the Contralateral Eye After Cataract Surgery in the First Eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2015;56:5566-73. [Crossref] [PubMed]
74. Gong X, Ren Y, Fang X, et al. Substance P induces sympathetic immune response in the contralateral eye after the first eye cataract surgery in type 2 diabetic patients. BMC Ophthalmol 2020;20:339. [Crossref] [PubMed]
75. Carr MW, Roth SJ, Luther E, et al. Monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 acts as a T-lymphocyte chemoattractant. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1994;91:3652-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
76. Suvas S. Role of Substance P Neuropeptide in Inflammation, Wound Healing, and Tissue Homeostasis. J Immunol 2017;199:1543-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
77. Fischer F, Martin G, Agostini HT. Activation of retinal microglia rather than microglial cell density correlates with retinal neovascularization in the mouse model of oxygen-induced retinopathy. J Neuroinflammation 2011;8:120. [Crossref] [PubMed]
78. Wang X, Wang T, Lam E, et al. Ocular Vascular Diseases: From Retinal Immune Privilege to Inflammation. Int J Mol Sci 2023;24:12090. [Crossref] [PubMed]
79. Gupta N, Brown KE, Milam AH. Activated microglia in human retinitis pigmentosa, late-onset retinal degeneration, and age-related macular degeneration. Exp Eye Res 2003;76:463-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
80. Adamus G, Chew EY, Ferris FL, et al. Prevalence of anti-retinal autoantibodies in different stages of Age-related macular degeneration. BMC Ophthalmol 2014;14:154. [Crossref] [PubMed]
81. Patel N, Ohbayashi M, Nugent AK, et al. Circulating anti-retinal antibodies as immune markers in age-related macular degeneration. Immunology 2005;115:422-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
82. Morohoshi K, Goodwin AM, Ohbayashi M, et al. Autoimmunity in retinal degeneration: autoimmune retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration. J Autoimmun 2009;33:247-54. [Crossref] [PubMed]
83. Manikandan SK, Logan A, Cerrada-Gimenez M, et al. Immune System, Inflammation and Autoantigens in Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Pathological Significance and Therapeutic Importance. Life (Basel) 2023;13:2236. [Crossref] [PubMed]
84. Rübsam A, Parikh S, Fort PE. Role of Inflammation in Diabetic Retinopathy. Int J Mol Sci 2018;19:942. [Crossref] [PubMed]
85. Joussen AM, Poulaki V, Le ML, et al. A central role for inflammation in the pathogenesis of diabetic retinopathy. FASEB J 2004;18:1450-2. [Crossref] [PubMed]
86. Zeng HY, Green WR, Tso MO. Microglial activation in human diabetic retinopathy. Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:227-32. [Crossref] [PubMed]
87. Abcouwer SF, Shanmugam S, Muthusamy A, et al. Inflammatory resolution and vascular barrier restoration after retinal ischemia reperfusion injury. J Neuroinflammation 2021;18:186. [Crossref] [PubMed]
88. He S, Liu C, Ren C, et al. Immunological Landscape of Retinal Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury: Insights into Resident and Peripheral Immune Cell Responses. Aging Dis 2024;16:115-36. [Crossref] [PubMed]
89. Wagner N, Reinehr S, Palmhof M, et al. Microglia Activation in Retinal Ischemia Triggers Cytokine and Toll-Like Receptor Response. J Mol Neurosci 2021;71:527-44. [Crossref] [PubMed]
90. Blanton SH, Heckenlively JR, Cottingham AW, et al. Linkage mapping of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa (RP1) to the pericentric region of human chromosome 8. Genomics 1991;11:857-69. [Crossref] [PubMed]
91. Holtman IR, Raj DD, Miller JA, et al. Induction of a common microglia gene expression signature by aging and neurodegenerative conditions: a co-expression meta-analysis. Acta Neuropathol Commun 2015;3:31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
92. McKay GJ, Patterson CC, Chakravarthy U, et al. Evidence of association of APOE with age-related macular degeneration: a pooled analysis of 15 studies. Hum Mutat 2011;32:1407-16. [Crossref] [PubMed]
93. Chiu IM, Morimoto ET, Goodarzi H, et al. A neurodegeneration-specific gene-expression signature of acutely isolated microglia from an amyotrophic lateral sclerosis mouse model. Cell Rep 2013;4:385-401. [Crossref] [PubMed]
94. Keren-Shaul H, Spinrad A, Weiner A, et al. A Unique Microglia Type Associated with Restricting Development of Alzheimer's Disease. Cell 2017;169:1276-1290.e17. [Crossref] [PubMed]
95. Krasemann S, Madore C, Cialic R, et al. The TREM2-APOE Pathway Drives the Transcriptional Phenotype of Dysfunctional Microglia in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Immunity 2017;47:566-581.e9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
96. Li Z, Ju X, Silveira PA, et al. CD83: Activation Marker for Antigen Presenting Cells and Its Therapeutic Potential. Front Immunol 2019;10:1312. [Crossref] [PubMed]
97. Li ZH, Dulyaninova NG, House RP, et al. S100A4 regulates macrophage chemotaxis. Mol Biol Cell 2010;21:2598-610. [Crossref] [PubMed]
98. Sheen JH, Strainic MG, Liu J, et al. TLR-Induced Murine Dendritic Cell (DC) Activation Requires DC-Intrinsic Complement. J Immunol 2017;199:278-91. [Crossref] [PubMed]
99. Apaydin DC, Zakarauskas-Seth BI, Carnevale L, et al. Interferon-γ drives macrophage reprogramming, cerebrovascular remodelling, and cognitive dysfunction in a zebrafish and a mouse model of ion imbalance and pressure overload. Cardiovasc Res 2023;119:1234-49. [Crossref] [PubMed]
100. DeDreu J, Basta MD, Walker JL, et al. Immune Responses Induced at One Hour Post Cataract Surgery Wounding of the Chick Lens. Biomolecules 2023;13:1615. [Crossref] [PubMed]
101. Jiang J, Shihan MH, Wang Y, et al. Lens Epithelial Cells Initiate an Inflammatory Response Following Cataract Surgery. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2018;59:4986-97. [Crossref] [PubMed]
102. Le PM, Pal-Ghosh S, Menko AS, et al. Immune Cells Localize to Sites of Corneal Erosions in C57BL/6 Mice. Biomolecules 2023;13:1059. [Crossref] [PubMed]
103. Stepp MA, Pal-Ghosh S, Tadvalkar G, et al. Molecular basis of Mitomycin C enhanced corneal sensory nerve repair after debridement wounding. Sci Rep 2018;8:16960. [Crossref] [PubMed]
104. Gschwandtner M, Derler R, Midwood KS. More Than Just Attractive: How CCL2 Influences Myeloid Cell Behavior Beyond Chemotaxis. Front Immunol 2019;10:2759. [Crossref] [PubMed]
105. Mantovani A, Dinarello CA, Molgora M, et al. Interleukin-1 and Related Cytokines in the Regulation of Inflammation and Immunity. Immunity 2019;50:778-95. [Crossref] [PubMed]
106. Feng X, Ji Y, Zhang C, et al. CCL6 promotes M2 polarization and inhibits macrophage autophagy by activating PI3-kinase/Akt signalling pathway during skin wound healing. Exp Dermatol 2023;32:403-12. [Crossref] [PubMed]
107. John SL, Morgan K, Tullo AB, et al. Corneal autoimmunity in patients with peripheral ulcerative keratitis (PUK) in association with rheumatoid arthritis and Wegener's granulomatosis. Eye (Lond) 1992;6:630-6.
108. Albers FW, Majoor MH, Van der Gaag R. Corneal autoimmunity in a patient with relapsing polychondritis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1992;249:296-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
109. Streilein JW. Immune regulation and the eye: a dangerous compromise. FASEB J 1987;1:199-208.
110. Kaplan HJ, Streilein JW, Stevens TR. Transplantation immunology of the anterior chamber of the eye. II. Immune response to allogeneic cells. J Immunol 1975;115:805-10.
111. Ferguson TA, Kaplan HJ. The immune response and the eye. I. The effects of monoclonal antibodies to T suppressor factors in anterior chamber-associated immune deviation (ACAID). J Immunol 1987;139:346-51.
112. Ferguson TA, Hayashi JD, Kaplan HJ. The immune response and the eye. III. Anterior chamber-associated immune deviation can be adoptively transferred by serum. J Immunol 1989;143:821-6.
113. Ferguson TA, Waldrep JC, Kaplan HJ. The immune response and the eye. II. The nature of T suppressor cell induction in anterior chamber-associated immune deviation (ACAID). J Immunol 1987;139:352-7.
114. Kerr EC, Raveney BJ, Copland DA, et al. Analysis of retinal cellular infiltrate in experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis reveals multiple regulatory cell populations. J Autoimmun 2008;31:354-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
115. Kaye S, Choudhary A. Herpes simplex keratitis. Prog Retin Eye Res 2006;25:355-80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
116. Okamoto S, Streilein JW. Role of inflammatory cytokines in induction of anterior chamber-associated immune deviation. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 1998;6:1-11. [Crossref] [PubMed]
117. Wilbanks GA, Mammolenti M, Streilein JW. Studies on the induction of anterior chamber-associated immune deviation (ACAID). II. Eye-derived cells participate in generating blood-borne signals that induce ACAID. J Immunol 1991;146:3018-24.
118. Li X, Wang Y, Urso D, et al. Thymocytes induced by antigen injection into the anterior chamber activate splenic CD8+ suppressor cells and enhance the antigen-induced production of immunoglobulin G1 antibodies. Immunology 2004;113:44-56. [Crossref] [PubMed]
119. Cone RE, Pais R. Anterior Chamber-Associated Immune Deviation (ACAID): An Acute Response to Ocular Insult Protects from Future Immune-Mediated Damage? Ophthalmol Eye Dis 2009;1:33-40. [Crossref] [PubMed]
120. Vendomèle J, Khebizi Q, Fisson S. Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Anterior Chamber-Associated Immune Deviation (ACAID): What We Have Learned from Knockout Mice. Front Immunol 2017;8:1686. [Crossref] [PubMed]
121. Stein-Streilein J, Streilein JW. Anterior chamber associated immune deviation (ACAID): regulation, biological relevance, and implications for therapy. Int Rev Immunol 2002;21:123-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
122. Hsu SM, Mathew R, Taylor AW, et al. Ex-vivo tolerogenic F4/80⁺ antigen-presenting cells (APC) induce efferent CD8⁺ regulatory T cell-dependent suppression of experimental autoimmune uveitis. Clin Exp Immunol 2014;176:37-48. [Crossref] [PubMed]
123. Durrani OM, Tehrani NN, Marr JE, et al. Degree, duration, and causes of visual loss in uveitis. Br J Ophthalmol 2004;88:1159-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
124. Siddique SS, Shah R, Suelves AM, et al. Road to remission: a comprehensive review of therapy in uveitis. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2011;20:1497-515. [Crossref] [PubMed]
125. Jabs DA, Nussenblatt RB, Rosenbaum JT, et al. Standardization of uveitis nomenclature for reporting clinical data. Results of the First International Workshop. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140:509-16.
126. Rothova A, Buitenhuis HJ, Meenken C, et al. Uveitis and systemic disease. Br J Ophthalmol 1992;76:137-41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
127. Bodaghi B, Cassoux N, Wechsler B, et al. Chronic severe uveitis: etiology and visual outcome in 927 patients from a single center. Medicine (Baltimore) 2001;80:263-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
128. Grange LK, Kouchouk A, Dalal MD, et al. Neoplastic masquerade syndromes in patients with uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 2014;157:526-31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
129. Lee RW, Nicholson LB, Sen HN, et al. Autoimmune and autoinflammatory mechanisms in uveitis. Semin Immunopathol 2014;36:581-94. [Crossref] [PubMed]
130. Caspi RR. A look at autoimmunity and inflammation in the eye. J Clin Invest 2010;120:3073-83. [Crossref] [PubMed]
131. Perez VL, Caspi RR. Immune mechanisms in inflammatory and degenerative eye disease. Trends Immunol 2015;36:354-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
132. Kang H, Sun H, Yang Y, et al. Autoimmune uveitis in Behçet's disease and Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease differ in tissue immune infiltration and T cell clonality. Clin Transl Immunology 2023;12:e1461. [Crossref] [PubMed]
133. Hassman LM, Paley MA, Esaulova E, et al. Clinicomolecular Identification of Conserved and Individualized Features of Granulomatous Uveitis. Ophthalmol Sci 2021;1:100010. [Crossref] [PubMed]
134. Basu S, Hassman L, Kodati S, et al. Intraocular Immune Response in Human Uveitis: Time to Look Beyond Animal Models. Am J Ophthalmol 2024;266:17-25. [Crossref] [PubMed]
135. Kulkarni P. Review: uveitis and immunosuppressive drugs. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2001;17:181-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
136. Nussenblatt RB, Fortin E, Schiffman R, et al. Treatment of noninfectious intermediate and posterior uveitis with the humanized anti-Tac mAb: a phase I/II clinical trial. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96:7462-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
137. Gao W, Jin X, Zhou P, et al. Relationship between Uveitis and the Differential Reactivity of Retinal Microglia. Ophthalmic Res 2023;66:1206-12. [Crossref] [PubMed]
138. Egwuagu CE, Charukamnoetkanok P, Gery I. Thymic expression of autoantigens correlates with resistance to autoimmune disease. J Immunol 1997;159:3109-12.
139. Takase H, Yu CR, Mahdi RM, et al. Thymic expression of peripheral tissue antigens in humans: a remarkable variability among individuals. Int Immunol 2005;17:1131-40. [Crossref] [PubMed]
140. Sakaguchi S, Sakaguchi N. Regulatory T cells in immunologic self-tolerance and autoimmune disease. Int Rev Immunol 2005;24:211-26. [Crossref] [PubMed]
141. Grajewski RS, Silver PB, Agarwal RK, et al. Endogenous IRBP can be dispensable for generation of natural CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells that protect from IRBP-induced retinal autoimmunity. J Exp Med 2006;203:851-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
142. Agarwal RK, Caspi RR. Rodent models of experimental autoimmune uveitis. Methods Mol Med 2004;102:395-419. [Crossref] [PubMed]
143. Calder VL, Zhao ZS, Wang Y, et al. Effects of CD8 depletion on retinal soluble antigen induced experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis. Immunology 1993;79:255-62.
144. Caspi RR, Kuwabara T, Nussenblatt RB. Characterization of a suppressor cell line which downgrades experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis in the rat. J Immunol 1988;140:2579-84.
145. Han G, Shao H, Peng Y, et al. Suppressor role of rat CD8+CD45RClow T cells in experimental autoimmune uveitis (EAU). J Neuroimmunol 2007;183:81-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
146. Voigt V, Wikstrom ME, Kezic JM, et al. Ocular antigen does not cause disease unless presented in the context of inflammation. Sci Rep 2017;7:14226. [Crossref] [PubMed]
147. Boldison J, Chu CJ, Copland DA, et al. Tissue-resident exhausted effector memory CD8+ T cells accumulate in the retina during chronic experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis. J Immunol 2014;192:4541-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
148. Chan CC, Mochizuki M, Nussenblatt RB, et al. T-lymphocyte subsets in experimental autoimmune uveitis. Clin Immunol Immunopathol 1985;35:103-10. [Crossref] [PubMed]
149. Wakim LM, Woodward-Davis A, Bevan MJ. Memory T cells persisting within the brain after local infection show functional adaptations to their tissue of residence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010;107:17872-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
150. Epps SJ, Boldison J, Stimpson ML, et al. Re-programming immunosurveillance in persistent non-infectious ocular inflammation. Prog Retin Eye Res 2018;65:93-106. [Crossref] [PubMed]
151. Wherry EJ. T cell exhaustion. Nat Immunol 2011;12:492-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
152. Amadi-Obi A, Yu CR, Liu X, et al. TH17 cells contribute to uveitis and scleritis and are expanded by IL-2 and inhibited by IL-27/STAT1. Nat Med 2007;13:711-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
153. Luger D, Silver PB, Tang J, et al. Either a Th17 or a Th1 effector response can drive autoimmunity: conditions of disease induction affect dominant effector category. J Exp Med 2008;205:799-810. [Crossref] [PubMed]
154. Damsker JM, Hansen AM, Caspi RR. Th1 and Th17 cells: adversaries and collaborators. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2010;1183:211-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
155. Zhao C, Yang P, He H, et al. S-antigen specific T helper type 1 response is present in Behcet's disease. Mol Vis 2008;14:1456-64.
156. Chi W, Zhu X, Yang P, et al. Upregulated IL-23 and IL-17 in Behçet patients with active uveitis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:3058-64. [Crossref] [PubMed]
157. Jiang HR, Lumsden L, Forrester JV. Macrophages and dendritic cells in IRBP-induced experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis in B10RIII mice. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:3177-85.
158. Caspi RR, Chan CC, Fujino Y, et al. Recruitment of antigen-nonspecific cells plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of a T cell-mediated organ-specific autoimmune disease, experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis. J Neuroimmunol 1993;47:177-88. [Crossref] [PubMed]
159. Forrester JV, Huitinga I, Lumsden L, et al. Marrow-derived activated macrophages are required during the effector phase of experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis in rats. Curr Eye Res 1998;17:426-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
160. Dick AD, Duncan L, Hale G, et al. Neutralizing TNF-alpha activity modulates T-cell phenotype and function in experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis. J Autoimmun 1998;11:255-64. [Crossref] [PubMed]
161. Dick AD, McMenamin PG, Körner H, et al. Inhibition of tumor necrosis factor activity minimizes target organ damage in experimental autoimmune uveoretinitis despite quantitatively normal activated T cell traffic to the retina. Eur J Immunol 1996;26:1018-25. [Crossref] [PubMed]
162. Jones LS, Rizzo LV, Agarwal RK, et al. IFN-gamma-deficient mice develop experimental autoimmune uveitis in the context of a deviant effector response. J Immunol 1997;158:5997-6005.
163. Wang L, Yu CR, Kim HP, et al. Key role for IL-21 in experimental autoimmune uveitis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011;108:9542-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
164. Chong WP, Mattapallil MJ, Raychaudhuri K, et al. The Cytokine IL-17A Limits Th17 Pathogenicity via a Negative Feedback Loop Driven by Autocrine Induction of IL-24. Immunity 2020;53:384-397.e5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
165. Zielinski CE, Mele F, Aschenbrenner D, et al. Pathogen-induced human TH17 cells produce IFN-γ or IL-10 and are regulated by IL-1β. Nature 2012;484:514-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
166. Xu H, Agalioti T, Zhao J, et al. The induction and function of the anti-inflammatory fate of T(H)17 cells. Nat Commun 2020;11:3334. [Crossref] [PubMed]
167. Zong Y, Tong X, Chong WP. Th17 Response in Uveitis: A Double-Edged Sword in Ocular Inflammation and Immune Regulation. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2025;68:26. [Crossref] [PubMed]
168. Richardson RB, Ainsbury EA, Prescott CR, et al. Etiology of posterior subcapsular cataracts based on a review of risk factors including aging, diabetes, and ionizing radiation. Int J Radiat Biol 2020;96:1339-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
169. Ozates S, Berker N, Cakar Ozdal P, et al. Phacoemulsification in patients with uveitis: long-term outcomes. BMC Ophthalmol 2020;20:109. [Crossref] [PubMed]
170. Llop SM, Papaliodis GN. Cataract Surgery Complications in Uveitis Patients: A Review Article. Semin Ophthalmol 2018;33:64-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
171. DeDreu J, Pal-Ghosh S, Mattapallil MJ, et al. Uveitis-mediated immune cell invasion through the extracellular matrix of the lens capsule. FASEB J 2022;36:e21995. [Crossref] [PubMed]
172. Le PM, Mattapallil MJ, Caspi RR, et al. Immunoregulatory Properties of Immune Cells that Associate with the Lens Capsule Surface during Acute and Resolution Phases of Experimental Autoimmune Uveitis. Am J Pathol 2024;194:2194-211. [Crossref] [PubMed]
173. Okunuki Y, Mukai R, Nakao T, et al. Retinal microglia initiate neuroinflammation in ocular autoimmunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2019;116:9989-98. [Crossref] [PubMed]
174. Luo L, Yang J, Oh Y, et al. Controlled release of corticosteroid with biodegradable nanoparticles for treating experimental autoimmune uveitis. J Control Release 2019;296:68-80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
175. Liu Y, Zhao C, Meng J, et al. Galectin-3 regulates microglial activation and promotes inflammation through TLR4/MyD88/NF-kB in experimental autoimmune uveitis. Clin Immunol 2022;236:108939. [Crossref] [PubMed]
176. Cheng Z, Yang Y, Duan F, et al. Inhibition of Notch1 Signaling Alleviates Endotoxin-Induced Inflammation Through Modulating Retinal Microglia Polarization. Front Immunol 2019;10:389. [Crossref] [PubMed]
177. Huang Y, He J, Liang H, et al. Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Regulates Apoptosis and Inflammation in a Murine Model of Experimental Autoimmune Uveitis. Front Immunol 2018;9:1713. [Crossref] [PubMed]
178. Wang G, Li X, Li N, et al. Icariin alleviates uveitis by targeting peroxiredoxin 3 to modulate retinal microglia M1/M2 phenotypic polarization. Redox Biol 2022;52:102297. [Crossref] [PubMed]
179. Knutson OS, Choi S, Williams S, et al. Comparative models of uveitis. Eye (Lond) 2025;39:1446-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
180. Mérida S, Sancho-Tello M, Almansa I, et al. Bevacizumab Diminishes Inflammation in an Acute Endotoxin-Induced Uveitis Model. Front Pharmacol 2018;9:649. [Crossref] [PubMed]
181. Shi X, Zhu S, Jin H, et al. The Anti-Inflammatory Effect of KS23, A Novel Peptide Derived From Globular Adiponectin, on Endotoxin-Induced Uveitis in Rats. Front Pharmacol 2020;11:585446. [Crossref] [PubMed]
182. Cortes LM, Mattapallil MJ, Silver PB, et al. Repertoire analysis and new pathogenic epitopes of IRBP in C57BL/6 (H-2b) and B10.RIII (H-2r) mice. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:1946-56. [Crossref] [PubMed]
183. Chen J, Qian H, Horai R, et al. Comparative analysis of induced vs. spontaneous models of autoimmune uveitis targeting the interphotoreceptor retinoid binding protein. PLoS One 2013;8:e72161.
184. Yin M, Smith JA, Chou M, et al. Tracking the role of Aire in immune tolerance to the eye with a TCR transgenic mouse model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2024;121:e2311487121. [Crossref] [PubMed]
185. Chen J, Qian H, Horai R, et al. Mouse Models of Experimental Autoimmune Uveitis: Comparative Analysis of Adjuvant-Induced vs Spontaneous Models of Uveitis. Curr Mol Med 2015;15:550-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
186. Huber A, Diedrichs-Möhring M, Wildner G. Spontaneously relapsing-remitting experimental autoimmune uveitis in rats allows successful therapeutic oral tolerance induction in ongoing disease. Mol Immunol 2015;63:215-26. [Crossref] [PubMed]
187. Hooper LV, Littman DR, Macpherson AJ. Interactions between the microbiota and the immune system. Science 2012;336:1268-73. [Crossref] [PubMed]
188. Zárate-Bladés CR, Horai R, Caspi RR. Regulation of Autoimmunity by the Microbiome. DNA Cell Biol 2016;35:455-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
189. McDermott AM. Antimicrobial compounds in tears. Exp Eye Res 2013;117:53-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
190. Graham JE, Moore JE, Jiru X, et al. Ocular pathogen or commensal: a PCR-based study of surface bacterial flora in normal and dry eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48:5616-23. [Crossref] [PubMed]
191. Willcox MD. Characterization of the normal microbiota of the ocular surface. Exp Eye Res 2013;117:99-105. [Crossref] [PubMed]
192. Suto C, Morinaga M, Yagi T, et al. Conjunctival sac bacterial flora isolated prior to cataract surgery. Infect Drug Resist 2012;5:37-41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
193. Andersson J, Vogt JK, Dalgaard MD, et al. Ocular surface microbiota in patients with aqueous tear-deficient dry eye. Ocul Surf 2021;19:210-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
194. Garza A, Diaz G, Hamdan M, et al. Homeostasis and Defense at the Surface of the Eye. The Conjunctival Microbiota. Curr Eye Res 2021;46:1-6.
195. Huang Y, Yang B, Li W. Defining the normal core microbiome of conjunctival microbial communities. Clin Microbiol Infect 2016;22:643.e7-643.e12. [Crossref] [PubMed]
196. Dong Q, Brulc JM, Iovieno A, et al. Diversity of bacteria at healthy human conjunctiva. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52:5408-13. [Crossref] [PubMed]
197. Shivaji S, Jayasudha R, Sai Prashanthi G, et al. The Human Ocular Surface Fungal Microbiome. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2019;60:451-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
198. Wang Y, Chen H, Xia T, et al. Characterization of fungal microbiota on normal ocular surface of humans. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020;26:123.e9-123.e13. [Crossref] [PubMed]
199. Mazanec MB, Nedrud JG, Kaetzel CS, et al. A three-tiered view of the role of IgA in mucosal defense. Immunol Today 1993;14:430-5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
200. Peterson DA, McNulty NP, Guruge JL, et al. IgA response to symbiotic bacteria as a mediator of gut homeostasis. Cell Host Microbe 2007;2:328-39. [Crossref] [PubMed]
201. Macpherson AJ, Köller Y, McCoy KD. The bilateral responsiveness between intestinal microbes and IgA. Trends Immunol 2015;36:460-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
202. Clarke TB, Davis KM, Lysenko ES, et al. Recognition of peptidoglycan from the microbiota by Nod1 enhances systemic innate immunity. Nat Med 2010;16:228-31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
203. Deshmukh HS, Liu Y, Menkiti OR, et al. The microbiota regulates neutrophil homeostasis and host resistance to Escherichia coli K1 sepsis in neonatal mice. Nat Med 2014;20:524-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
204. Kugadas A, Gadjeva M. Impact of Microbiome on Ocular Health. Ocul Surf 2016;14:342-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
205. Chang CJ, Winn BJ. Perturbations of the ocular surface microbiome and their effect on host immune function. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2023;34:181-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
206. de Paiva CS, St Leger AJ, Caspi RR. Mucosal immunology of the ocular surface. Mucosal Immunol 2022;15:1143-57. [Crossref] [PubMed]
207. Zilliox MJ, Bouchard CS. The Microbiome, Ocular Surface, and Corneal Disorders. Am J Pathol 2023;193:1648-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
208. Zilliox MJ, Gange WS, Kuffel G, et al. Assessing the ocular surface microbiome in severe ocular surface diseases. Ocul Surf 2020;18:706-12. [Crossref] [PubMed]
209. Cavuoto KM, Mendez R, Miller D, et al. Effect of clinical parameters on the ocular surface microbiome in children and adults. Clin Ophthalmol 2018;12:1189-97. [Crossref] [PubMed]
210. Eisenhofer R, Minich JJ, Marotz C, et al. Contamination in Low Microbial Biomass Microbiome Studies: Issues and Recommendations. Trends Microbiol 2019;27:105-17. [Crossref] [PubMed]
211. Markoulli M, Flanagan J, Tummanapalli SS, et al. The impact of diabetes on corneal nerve morphology and ocular surface integrity. Ocul Surf 2018;16:45-57. [Crossref] [PubMed]
212. Li S, Yi G, Peng H, et al. How Ocular Surface Microbiota Debuts in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2019;9:202. [Crossref] [PubMed]
213. Thomason CA, Leon A, Kirkpatrick LT, et al. Eye of the Finch: characterization of the ocular microbiome of house finches in relation to mycoplasmal conjunctivitis. Environ Microbiol 2017;19:1439-49. [Crossref] [PubMed]
214. Consolandi C, Turroni S, Emmi G, et al. Behçet's syndrome patients exhibit specific microbiome signature. Autoimmun Rev 2015;14:269-76. [Crossref] [PubMed]
215. de Paiva CS, Jones DB, Stern ME, et al. Altered Mucosal Microbiome Diversity and Disease Severity in Sjögren Syndrome. Sci Rep 2016;6:23561. [Crossref] [PubMed]
216. Mshangila B, Paddy M, Kajumbula H, et al. External ocular surface bacterial isolates and their antimicrobial susceptibility patterns among pre-operative cataract patients at Mulago National Hospital in Kampala, Uganda. BMC Ophthalmol 2013;13:71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
217. Miller D, Iovieno A. The role of microbial flora on the ocular surface. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;9:466-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
218. Li Z, Gong Y, Chen S, et al. Comparative portrayal of ocular surface microbe with and without dry eye. J Microbiol 2019;57:1025-32. [Crossref] [PubMed]
219. Hori Y, Maeda N, Sakamoto M, et al. Bacteriologic profile of the conjunctiva in the patients with dry eye. Am J Ophthalmol 2008;146:729-34. [Crossref] [PubMed]
220. Willis KA, Postnikoff CK, Freeman A, et al. The closed eye harbours a unique microbiome in dry eye disease. Sci Rep 2020;10:12035. [Crossref] [PubMed]
221. Alves M, Angerami RN, Rocha EM. Dry eye disease caused by viral infection Arq Bras Oftalmol 2013;76:129-32. review. [Crossref] [PubMed]
222. Qi Y, Wan Y, Li T, et al. Comparison of the Ocular Microbiomes of Dry Eye Patients With and Without Autoimmune Disease. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:716867. [Crossref] [PubMed]
223. Seal DV, McGill JI, Mackie IA, et al. Bacteriology and tear protein profiles of the dry eye. Br J Ophthalmol 1986;70:122-5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
224. Wang Y, Ding Y, Jiang X, et al. Bacteria and Dry Eye: A Narrative Review. J Clin Med 2022;11:4019. [Crossref] [PubMed]
225. Dong X, Wang Y, Wang W, et al. Composition and Diversity of Bacterial Community on the Ocular Surface of Patients With Meibomian Gland Dysfunction. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2019;60:4774-83. [Crossref] [PubMed]
226. Watters GA, Turnbull PR, Swift S, et al. Ocular surface microbiome in meibomian gland dysfunction. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2017;45:105-11. [Crossref] [PubMed]
227. Horai R, Silver PB, Chen J, et al. Breakdown of immune privilege and spontaneous autoimmunity in mice expressing a transgenic T cell receptor specific for a retinal autoantigen. J Autoimmun 2013;44:21-33. [Crossref] [PubMed]
228. Horai R, Caspi RR. Microbiome and Autoimmune Uveitis. Front Immunol 2019;10:232. [Crossref] [PubMed]
229. Horai R, Zárate-Bladés CR, Dillenburg-Pilla P, et al. Microbiota-Dependent Activation of an Autoreactive T Cell Receptor Provokes Autoimmunity in an Immunologically Privileged Site. Immunity 2015;43:343-53. [Crossref] [PubMed]
230. Zárate-Bladés CR, Horai R, Mattapallil MJ, et al. Gut microbiota as a source of a surrogate antigen that triggers autoimmunity in an immune privileged site. Gut Microbes 2017;8:59-66. [Crossref] [PubMed]
231. Heissigerova J, Seidler Stangova P, Klimova A, et al. The Microbiota Determines Susceptibility to Experimental Autoimmune Uveoretinitis. J Immunol Res 2016;2016:5065703. [Crossref] [PubMed]
232. Nakamura YK, Metea C, Karstens L, et al. Gut Microbial Alterations Associated With Protection From Autoimmune Uveitis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2016;57:3747-58. [Crossref] [PubMed]
233. Nakamura YK, Janowitz C, Metea C, et al. Short chain fatty acids ameliorate immune-mediated uveitis partially by altering migration of lymphocytes from the intestine. Sci Rep 2017;7:11745. [Crossref] [PubMed]
234. Salvador R, Zhang A, Horai R, et al. Microbiota as Drivers and as Therapeutic Targets in Ocular and Tissue Specific Autoimmunity. Front Cell Dev Biol 2020;8:606751. [Crossref] [PubMed]
235. Ye Z, Zhang N, Wu C, et al. A metagenomic study of the gut microbiome in Behcet's disease. Microbiome 2018;6:135. [Crossref] [PubMed]
236. Ye Z, Wu C, Zhang N, et al. Altered gut microbiome composition in patients with Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease. Gut Microbes 2020;11:539-55. [Crossref] [PubMed]
237. Wang C, Zaheer M, Bian F, et al. Sjögren-Like Lacrimal Keratoconjunctivitis in Germ-Free Mice. Int J Mol Sci 2018;19:565. [Crossref] [PubMed]
238. Wen X, Hu X, Miao L, et al. Epigenetics, microbiota, and intraocular inflammation: New paradigms of immune regulation in the eye. Prog Retin Eye Res 2018;64:84-95. [Crossref] [PubMed]
239. Zinkernagel MS, Zysset-Burri DC, Keller I, et al. Association of the Intestinal Microbiome with the Development of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Sci Rep 2017;7:40826. [Crossref] [PubMed]
240. Rullo J, Far PM, Quinn M, et al. Local oral and nasal microbiome diversity in age-related macular degeneration. Sci Rep 2020;10:3862. [Crossref] [PubMed]
241. Ho EXP, Cheung CMG, Sim S, et al. Human pharyngeal microbiota in age-related macular degeneration. PLoS One 2018;13:e0201768. [Crossref] [PubMed]
242. Li JJ, Yi S, Wei L. Ocular Microbiota and Intraocular Inflammation. Front Immunol 2020;11:609765. [Crossref] [PubMed]
243. Lin P. The role of the intestinal microbiome in ocular inflammatory disease. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2018;29:261-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
244. Chew EY, Clemons TE, Agrón E, et al. Effect of Omega-3 Fatty Acids, Lutein/Zeaxanthin, or Other Nutrient Supplementation on Cognitive Function: The AREDS2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2015;314:791-801. [Crossref] [PubMed]
245. Napolitano P, Filippelli M, Davinelli S, et al. Influence of gut microbiota on eye diseases: an overview. Ann Med 2021;53:750-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
246. Kountouras J, Mylopoulos N, Boura P, et al. Relationship between Helicobacter pylori infection and glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2001;108:599-604. [Crossref] [PubMed]
247. Chmiela M, Michetti P. Inflammation, immunity, vaccines for Helicobacter infection. Helicobacter 2006;11:21-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
248. Zeng J, Liu H, Liu X, et al. The Relationship Between Helicobacter pylori Infection and Open-Angle Glaucoma: A Meta-Analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2015;56:5238-45. [Crossref] [PubMed]
249. Gong H, Zhang S, Li Q, et al. Gut microbiota compositional profile and serum metabolic phenotype in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Exp Eye Res 2020;191:107921. [Crossref] [PubMed]
250. Skrzypecki J, Izdebska J, Kamińska A, et al. Glaucoma patients have an increased level of trimethylamine, a toxic product of gut bacteria, in the aqueous humor: a pilot study. Int Ophthalmol 2021;41:341-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
251. Astafurov K, Elhawy E, Ren L, et al. Oral microbiome link to neurodegeneration in glaucoma. PLoS One 2014;9:e104416. [Crossref] [PubMed]
252. Choi SH, Oh JW, Ryu JS, et al. IRT5 Probiotics Changes Immune Modulatory Protein Expression in the Extraorbital Lacrimal Glands of an Autoimmune Dry Eye Mouse Model. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2020;61:42. [Crossref] [PubMed]
253. Kim J, Choi SH, Kim YJ, et al. Clinical Effect of IRT-5 Probiotics on Immune Modulation of Autoimmunity or Alloimmunity in the Eye. Nutrients 2017;9:1166. [Crossref] [PubMed]
254. Ji SK, Yan H, Jiang T, et al. Preparing the Gut with Antibiotics Enhances Gut Microbiota Reprogramming Efficiency by Promoting Xenomicrobiota Colonization. Front Microbiol 2017;8:1208. [Crossref] [PubMed]
255. Corrêa-Oliveira R, Fachi JL, Vieira A, et al. Regulation of immune cell function by short-chain fatty acids. Clin Transl Immunology 2016;5:e73. [Crossref] [PubMed]
256. Chisari G, Chisari EM, Borzi AM, et al. Aging Eye Microbiota in Dry Eye Syndrome in Patients Treated with Enterococcus faecium and Saccharomyces boulardii. Curr Clin Pharmacol 2017;12:99-105. [Crossref] [PubMed]
257. Santos TM, Ledbetter EC, Caixeta LS, et al. Isolation and characterization of two bacteriophages with strong in vitro antimicrobial activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from dogs with ocular infections. Am J Vet Res 2011;72:1079-86. [Crossref] [PubMed]
258. Singh PK, Donovan DM, Kumar A. Intravitreal injection of the chimeric phage endolysin Ply187 protects mice from Staphylococcus aureus endophthalmitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014;58:4621-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
259. Zhang Y, Li CX, Zhang XZ. Bacteriophage-mediated modulation of microbiota for diseases treatment. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2021;176:113856. [Crossref] [PubMed]
260. Rosenbaum JT, Bodaghi B, Couto C, et al. New observations and emerging ideas in diagnosis and management of non-infectious uveitis: A review. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2019;49:438-45. [Crossref] [PubMed]
261. Nussenblatt RB. Bench to bedside: new approaches to the immunotherapy of uveitic disease. Int Rev Immunol 2002;21:273-89. [Crossref] [PubMed]
262. Nussenblatt RB, Dinning WJ, Fujikawa LS, et al. Local cyclosporine therapy for experimental autoimmune uveitis in rats. Arch Ophthalmol 1985;103:1559-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
263. Sharma SM, Nestel AR, Lee RW, et al. Clinical review: Anti-TNFalpha therapies in uveitis: perspective on 5 years of clinical experience. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2009;17:403-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
264. Imrie FR, Dick AD. Biologics in the treatment of uveitis. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2007;18:481-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
265. Agarwal RK, Kang Y, Zambidis E, et al. Retroviral gene therapy with an immunoglobulin-antigen fusion construct protects from experimental autoimmune uveitis. J Clin Invest 2000;106:245-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
266. Silver PB, Agarwal RK, Su SB, et al. Hydrodynamic vaccination with DNA encoding an immunologically privileged retinal antigen protects from autoimmunity through induction of regulatory T cells. J Immunol 2007;179:5146-58. [Crossref] [PubMed]
267. Liang W, Karabekian Z, Mattapallil M, et al. B-cell delivered gene transfer of human S-Ag-Ig fusion protein protects from experimental autoimmune uveitis. Clin Immunol 2006;118:35-41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
268. Benucci M, Damiani A, Li Gobbi F, et al. Therapeutic Potential of Ixekizumab in the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Review on the Emerging Clinical Data. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2020;16:287-97. [Crossref] [PubMed]
269. Dick AD, Tugal-Tutkun I, Foster S, et al. Secukinumab in the treatment of noninfectious uveitis: results of three randomized, controlled clinical trials. Ophthalmology 2013;120:777-87. [Crossref] [PubMed]
270. Arepalli S, Rosenbaum JT. The use of biologics for uveitis associated with spondyloarthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2019;31:349-54. [Crossref] [PubMed]
271. Heissigerová J, Callanan D, de Smet MD, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab for the Treatment of Posterior Segment Noninfectious Uveitis (SARIL-NIU):: The Phase 2 SATURN Study. Ophthalmology 2019;126:428-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
272. Fabiani C, Vitale A, Emmi G, et al. Interleukin (IL)-1 inhibition with anakinra and canakinumab in Behçet's disease-related uveitis: a multicenter retrospective observational study. Clin Rheumatol 2017;36:191-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
273. Teabagy S, Wood E, Bilsbury E, et al. Ocular immunosuppressive microenvironment and novel drug delivery for control of uveitis. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2023;198:114869. [Crossref] [PubMed]
274. Ichiyama T, Zhao H, Catania A, et al. alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone inhibits NF-kappaB activation and IkappaBalpha degradation in human glioma cells and in experimental brain inflammation. Exp Neurol 1999;157:359-65. [Crossref] [PubMed]
275. Biros DJ, Namba K, Taylor AW. Alpha-MSH regulates protein ubiquitination in T cells. Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand) 2006;52:33-8.
276. Taylor AW, Lee DJ. The alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone induces conversion of effector T cells into treg cells. J Transplant 2011;2011:246856. [Crossref] [PubMed]
277. Lee DJ, Biros DJ, Taylor AW. Injection of an alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone expression plasmid is effective in suppressing experimental autoimmune uveitis. Int Immunopharmacol 2009;9:1079-86. [Crossref] [PubMed]
278. Martín AP, de Moraes LV, Tadokoro CE, et al. Administration of a peptide inhibitor of alpha4-integrin inhibits the development of experimental autoimmune uveitis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46:2056-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
279. Whitcup SM, DeBarge LR, Caspi RR, et al. Monoclonal antibodies against ICAM-1 (CD54) and LFA-1 (CD11a/CD18) inhibit experimental autoimmune uveitis. Clin Immunol Immunopathol 1993;67:143-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
280. Xu H, Manivannan A, Liversidge J, et al. Involvement of CD44 in leukocyte trafficking at the blood-retinal barrier. J Leukoc Biol 2002;72:1133-41.
281. Crane IJ, Xu H, Wallace C, et al. Involvement of CCR5 in the passage of Th1-type cells across the blood-retina barrier in experimental autoimmune uveitis. J Leukoc Biol 2006;79:435-43. [Crossref] [PubMed]
282. Chen J, Vistica BP, Takase H, et al. A unique pattern of up- and down-regulation of chemokine receptor CXCR3 on inflammation-inducing Th1 cells. Eur J Immunol 2004;34:2885-94. [Crossref] [PubMed]
283. Matozaki T, Murata Y, Okazawa H, et al. Functions and molecular mechanisms of the CD47-SIRPalpha signalling pathway. Trends Cell Biol 2009;19:72-80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
284. Okunuki Y, Tabor SJ, Lee MY, et al. CD47 Deficiency Ameliorates Ocular Autoimmune Inflammation. Front Immunol 2021;12:680568. [Crossref] [PubMed]
285. Förster R, Schubel A, Breitfeld D, et al. CCR7 coordinates the primary immune response by establishing functional microenvironments in secondary lymphoid organs. Cell 1999;99:23-33. [Crossref] [PubMed]
286. Jin Y, Shen L, Chong EM, et al. The chemokine receptor CCR7 mediates corneal antigen-presenting cell trafficking. Mol Vis 2007;13:626-34.
287. Jin Y, Chauhan SK, Saban DR, et al. Role of CCR7 in facilitating direct allosensitization and regulatory T-cell function in high-risk corneal transplantation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010;51:816-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
288. Schlereth S, Lee HS, Khandelwal P, et al. Blocking CCR7 at the ocular surface impairs the pathogenic contribution of dendritic cells in allergic conjunctivitis. Am J Pathol 2012;180:2351-60. [Crossref] [PubMed]
289. Saban DR. The chemokine receptor CCR7 expressed by dendritic cells: a key player in corneal and ocular surface inflammation. Ocul Surf 2014;12:87-99. [Crossref] [PubMed]
290. Williams DL, Wirostko BM, Gum G, et al. Topical Cross-Linked HA-Based Hydrogel Accelerates Closure of Corneal Epithelial Defects and Repair of Stromal Ulceration in Companion Animals. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2017;58:4616-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
291. Wirostko B, Mann BK, Williams DL, et al. Ophthalmic Uses of a Thiol-Modified Hyaluronan-Based Hydrogel. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) 2014;3:708-16. [Crossref] [PubMed]
292. Fernandes-Cunha GM, Jeong SH, Logan CM, et al. Supramolecular host-guest hyaluronic acid hydrogels enhance corneal wound healing through dynamic spatiotemporal effects. Ocul Surf 2022;23:148-61. [Crossref] [PubMed]
293. Kochenderfer JN, Wilson WH, Janik JE, et al. Eradication of B-lineage cells and regression of lymphoma in a patient treated with autologous T cells genetically engineered to recognize CD19. Blood 2010;116:4099-102. [Crossref] [PubMed]
294. Mackensen A, Müller F, Mougiakakos D, et al. Anti-CD19 CAR T cell therapy for refractory systemic lupus erythematosus. Nat Med 2022;28:2124-32. [Crossref] [PubMed]
295. Mougiakakos D, Krönke G, Völkl S, et al. CD19-Targeted CAR T Cells in Refractory Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2021;385:567-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
296. Al Ghulaiga FM, Alharbi I, Albloushi AF, et al. Safety and efficacy of rituximab in refractory noninfectious uveitis and scleritis. J Ophthalmic Inflamm Infect 2025;15:70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
297. Cao H, Ma X. Rituximab in the Treatment of Non-Infectious Uveitis: A Review. J Inflamm Res 2024;17:6765-80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
298. Miserocchi E, Modorati G. Rituximab for noninfectious uveitis. Dev Ophthalmol 2012;51:98-109. [Crossref] [PubMed]
299. Ng CC, Sy A, Cunningham ET Jr. Rituximab for non-infectious Uveitis and Scleritis. J Ophthalmic Inflamm Infect 2021;11:23. [Crossref] [PubMed]