⚠️ Partial verification only (2026-08-18): PubMed and publisher metadata, abstract, and publisher highlights were checked, but the complete article was unavailable. Sample counts, protocol details, compound-specific EC50 values, severity-stratified results, statistics, and mechanistic experiments remain unverified.
verified: falsegap/no-fulltext-access
Chen et al. 2018 — Lanosterol and isolated human cataract aggregates
TL;DR
The accessible abstract reports a quantitative ex-vivo assay using protein aggregates isolated from cataractous human lens material obtained during surgery. It states that lanosterol and 25-hydroxycholesterol were effective in the human-derived samples, with EC50 values at the ten-micromolar level, and that efficacy depended strongly on cataract severity.1 It does not provide compound-specific EC50 values or say which severity strata responded better. The assay bypassed the lens capsule and intact tissue architecture and did not test ocular delivery, whole-lens transparency, vision, or treatment in living people. gap/contradictory-evidence
What the accessible records establish
- The title, PubMed abstract, and publisher abstract identify the material as protein/crystallin aggregates isolated from surgically removed cataractous human lens material—not intact lenses or intact nuclei.
- The abstract reports both compounds as effective in this isolated-aggregate assay and describes their EC50 values only as being at the ten-micromolar level. “Tens of micromolar” and exact numerical EC50 values would be more specific than the accessible record supports.
- The abstract says efficacy depended strongly on cataract severity but gives no severity categories, direction, subgroup counts, effect estimates, or statistical test.
- The abstract calls the compounds mechanistically different but does not describe the evidence. Publisher highlights state that lanosterol released multiple human crystallin classes whereas 25-hydroxycholesterol released only α-crystallins; without the complete methods and results, that remains a publisher-highlight claim rather than an independently verified mechanistic finding.1
What remains unverified
The accessible records do not disclose the number of donors, number of lenses or aggregate preparations, cataract subtypes or grades, aggregate-isolation protocol, exposure concentrations and duration, comparator conditions, assay endpoint, replicate structure, compound-specific EC50 values, uncertainty intervals, or statistical analyses. They therefore do not establish that either compound clears an intact living lens or improves a clinical outcome.
This material boundary also means the report does not resolve the negative intact-nucleus and whole-lens experiments in shanmugam-2015-lanosterol-human-cataract-nuclei and daszynski-2019-lanosterol-failure. Aggregate state, tissue architecture, cataract severity, formulation, and delivery remain plausible sources of the differing results.
Extrapolation to humans
| Dimension | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Human material? | yes | The abstract reports aggregates isolated from surgically removed cataractous human lens material; donor and specimen counts are unavailable. |
| Intact-lens physiology retained? | no | Extraction removed anatomical and delivery barriers. |
| Clinical efficacy tested? | no | No living participant received treatment and no visual outcome was measured. |
Cited by wiki pages
[Auto-populated by Obsidian backlinks]
Footnotes
-
Chen XJ, Hu LD, Yao K, Yan YB · doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.10.175 · PMID:30392915 · PII:S0006-291X(18)32363-5 · Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2018;506(4):868–873 · ex-vivo isolated-aggregate assay using surgically obtained human cataract material · abstract and publisher-record verification only; complete article unavailable. ↩ ↩2