Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines can cause transient local and systemic post-vaccination reactions. The aim of this study was to report uveitis and other ocular complications following COVID-19 vaccination. The study included 42 eyes of 34 patients (20 females, 14 males), with a mean age of 49.8 years (range 18–83 years). The cases reported were three herpetic keratitis, two anterior scleritis, five anterior uveitis (AU), three toxoplasma retinochoroiditis, two Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada (VKH) disease reactivations, two pars planitis, two retinal vasculitis, one bilateral panuveitis in new-onset Behçet’s disease, three multiple evanescent white dot syndromes (MEWDS), one acute macular neuroretinopathy (AMN), five retinal vein occlusions (RVO), one non-arteritic ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), three activations of quiescent choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to myopia or uveitis, and one central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR). Mean time between vaccination and ocular complication onset was 9.4 days (range 1–30 days). Twenty-three cases occurred after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination (BNT162b2 mRNA), 7 after Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), 3 after ModernaTX vaccination (mRNA-1273), and 1 after Janssen Johnson & Johnson vaccine (Ad26.COV2). Uveitis and other ocular complications may develop after the administration of COVID-19 vaccine.

Non-infectious uveitis are intraocular inflammatory conditions caused by dysregulated activation of the immune response without any detectable infectious agents. The aim of this study was to explore potential markers and therapeutic targets for two distinct types of non-infectious uveitis associated with Behçet's disease (BD) and Vogt Koyanagi Harada (VKH) disease. Concentrations of 27 cytokines were investigated in aqueous humor (AH) samples from patients with active uveitis vs. healthy controls (HC) (n = 10 patients with BD-associated uveitis; n = 10 patients with VKH-associated uveitis; n = 10 HC) using the Bio-Plex Pro^TM human cytokine group I panel. Additionally, leukocytes in AH samples were counted with hemocytometers and characterized by flow cytometry. Eleven cytokines were differentially expressed between patients with uveitis and HC with a median concentration greater than 10 pg/ml. IL-6, IP-10, G-CSF, and IFNγ showed higher concentrations in AH samples from both BD and VKH patients while IL-2, IL-8, IL-13, TNFα, eotaxin, IL-1ra showed statistically significant higher concentrations only in AH samples from BD patients. GM-CSF was the sole cytokine with an opposite profile showing decreased levels in AH samples from BD patients. IL-1ra and IL-6 were detected at higher frequencies in AH samples from BD and VKH patients compared with those from HC while IFNγ and TNFα were not detected in HC. The concentrations of IL-6, IL-8, IP-10, G-CSF, IFNγ, TNFα, eotaxin, IL-1ra positively correlated with the concentrations of leukocytes in AH, suggesting that such cytokines can be produced by immune cells and/or attract and/or promote proliferation and survival of immune cells in these types of uveitis. The correlation matrix of cytokine concentrations in AH samples revealed that IFNγ, TNFα, eotaxin, IL-6, G-CSF highly correlated each other. The ratios of cytokine concentrations between AH and plasma intra-individuals showed that IL-2, IL-6, IP-10, GM-CSF were increased intraocularly. In conclusion, AH sampling followed by multiplex analysis of cytokines should be fostered in non-infectious uveitis to identify cytokines dysregulated intraocularly in each individual laying the groundwork for precision medicine.

Background and aim There is still no established treatment regimen for eyes with inflammatory choroidal neovascularisation (iCNV) treated with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections. This study compared the 24-month outcomes of two treatment regimens of anti-VEGF injections in eyes with iCNV. Methods Eyes with iCNV treated with anti-VEGF injections were divided into two groups: eyes treated with a loading phase of 3 monthly injections and then re-treated as needed (LOADING group) and eyes treated as needed from the beginning (PRN group). Visual acuity (VA), number of injections and iCNV recurrences at 24 months were compared between the groups. Results Eighty-two eyes were included, 42 in the LOADING and 40 in the PRN group. Baseline VA (mean(SD)) was 72.3 (15.8) letters in the LOADING vs 75.7 (15.6) letters in the PRN group (p=0.32). The VA (mean (95% CI)) increased at 3 months (+14.8 (10.6 to 18.9) and +11.2 (6.4 to 16) letters in the LOADING and PRN group, respectively) and remained significantly higher than baseline over the entire follow-up in both groups (all p<0.001). At 24 months, there was no difference in VA between the LOADING and PRN group (87.8 (13.8) vs 90.3 (11.3) letters, p=0.36) but the LOADING group received significantly more injections (median (Q1–Q3)) than the PRN (4.5 (3–7) vs 2.5 (2–3.2), p<0.0001). The iCNV recurrences were similar in both groups. Conclusions iCNV responded well to anti-VEGF with significant and sustained VA improvement. The loading phase did not confer any advantage in terms of outcomes. PRN regimen from the beginning was as effective as more intensive treatment.

Primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL), a rare aggressive malignancy primarily involving the retina and/or the vitreous, is a major diagnostic challenge for clinicians (who commonly misdiagnose it as chronic uveitis) as well as for pathologists (for biological and technical reasons). Delays in diagnosis and treatment are responsible for visual impairments and life-threatening consequences, usually related to central nervous system involvement. The identification of lymphoma cells in vitreous fluid, obtained by vitrectomy, is required for diagnosis. Of note, the scarcity of neoplastic cells in small volumes of vitreous sample, and the fragility of lymphoma cells with degenerative changes caused by previous steroid use for presumed uveitis makes diagnosis based on cytology plus immunophenotyping difficult. Interleukin levels, immunoglobulin heavy chain or T-cell receptor gene rearrangements, and MYD88 mutation are applied in combination with cytology to support diagnosis. We aim to describe the current laboratory technologies for PVRL diagnosis, focusing on the main issues that these methods have. In addition, new emerging diagnostic strategies, such as next-generation sequencing analysis, are discussed. The genetic profile of PVRL remains largely unexplored. Better knowledge of genetic alterations is critical for precision medicine interventions with target-based treatments of this lymphoma for which no standardised treatment protocol currently exists.