TY - JOUR
T1 - A comprehensive scoping review of methodological approaches and clinical applications of tear fluid biomarkers
AU - Gijs, Marlies
AU - van de Sande, Nienke
AU - Bonnet, Clémence
AU - Schmeetz, Jente
AU - Fernandes, Rosa
AU - Travé-Huarte, Sònia
AU - Huertas-Bello, Marcela
AU - Bo Chiang, Jeremy Chung
AU - Boychev, Nikolay
AU - Sharma, Shruti
AU - Brignole-Baudouin, Françoise
AU - Kessal, Karima
AU - Lingor, Paul
AU - Heunen, Maurice M.T.H.
AU - Chen, Xiangjun
AU - Datta, Ananya
AU - Liang, Li
AU - Cifuentes-González, Carlos
AU - Rojas-Carabali, William
AU - Agrawal, Rupesh
AU - de-la-Torre, Alejandra
AU - Mejía-Salgado, Germán
AU - Sharma, Nikhil
AU - Jüngert, Katharina
AU - Cuchillo-Ibáñez, Inmaculada
AU - Yang, Menglu
AU - Yeung, Vincent
AU - Ng, Veronica
AU - Pot, Davy
AU - Enríquez-de-Salamanca, Amalia
AU - Hagan, Suzanne
AU - Mergen, Burak
AU - Onal, Irem
AU - Kilicaslan, Necati Alp
AU - Simsek, Emrullah
AU - Utheim, Tor P.
AU - Magno, Morten s.
AU - Pedraza, Diego Ojeda
AU - Sabater, Alfonso L.
AU - Asbell, Penny
AU - Lengyel, Imre
AU - Dutta, Debarun
AU - Mrugacz, Malgorzata
AU - Joachim, Stephanie C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 The Authors
PY - 2025/5
Y1 - 2025/5
N2 - Tear fluid is an emerging source of disease biomarkers, drawing attention due to its quick, inexpensive, and non-invasive collection. The advancements in detection techniques enable the measurement of ultra-low biomarker levels from small sample volumes typical of tear fluid. The lack of standardized protocols for collection, processing, and analysis of tear fluid remains a significant challenge. To address this, we convened the Tear Research Network Review Taskforce in 2022 to review protocols from the past three decades, providing a comprehensive overview of the methodologies used in tear fluid biomarker research. A total of 1484 articles published from January 1974 to May 2024 from two electronic databases, Embase and Ovid MEDLINE, were reviewed. An exponential increase in the number of articles on tear fluid biomarkers was observed from 2015 onwards. The two most commonly reported collection methods were; glass capillaries (45.2%), and Schirmer's strips (25%), with glass capillary tube collection remaining the most frequent method until 2019, when Schirmer's strips became the leading method. Most articles analyzed tear fluid proteins (65%) and focused on a single analyte (32.3%). In recent years, an increase was observed in the type and number of examined analytes. The differences in the reported methodologies and protocols underscore the need for standardization and harmonization within the field of tear fluid biomarkers to minimize methodological differences and reduce variability in clinical outcomes. Consistent and detailed reporting is essential for improving the reproducibility and validity of tear fluid studies, in order to advance their potential clinical applications.
AB - Tear fluid is an emerging source of disease biomarkers, drawing attention due to its quick, inexpensive, and non-invasive collection. The advancements in detection techniques enable the measurement of ultra-low biomarker levels from small sample volumes typical of tear fluid. The lack of standardized protocols for collection, processing, and analysis of tear fluid remains a significant challenge. To address this, we convened the Tear Research Network Review Taskforce in 2022 to review protocols from the past three decades, providing a comprehensive overview of the methodologies used in tear fluid biomarker research. A total of 1484 articles published from January 1974 to May 2024 from two electronic databases, Embase and Ovid MEDLINE, were reviewed. An exponential increase in the number of articles on tear fluid biomarkers was observed from 2015 onwards. The two most commonly reported collection methods were; glass capillaries (45.2%), and Schirmer's strips (25%), with glass capillary tube collection remaining the most frequent method until 2019, when Schirmer's strips became the leading method. Most articles analyzed tear fluid proteins (65%) and focused on a single analyte (32.3%). In recent years, an increase was observed in the type and number of examined analytes. The differences in the reported methodologies and protocols underscore the need for standardization and harmonization within the field of tear fluid biomarkers to minimize methodological differences and reduce variability in clinical outcomes. Consistent and detailed reporting is essential for improving the reproducibility and validity of tear fluid studies, in order to advance their potential clinical applications.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85219374916&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85219374916&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2025.101338
DO - 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2025.101338
M3 - Review article
C2 - 39954936
AN - SCOPUS:85219374916
SN - 1350-9462
VL - 106
JO - Progress in Retinal and Eye Research
JF - Progress in Retinal and Eye Research
M1 - 101338
ER -