Although there are several studies that have provided frequency estimates for MGD, these studies have been limited in that they have provided simple frequency or prevalence, rather than incidence, estimates. Further, the studies have generally used nonstandardized definitions of MGD, making it difficult to directly compare the frequency estimates. Future population-based studies should be conducted with standardized classification criteria to better delineate the frequency of MGD, including both prevalence and incidence. Likewise, prior studies that have evaluated potential risk factors for MGD have been nonexistent, or limited by small size, cross-sectional design, and other methodological shortcomings. Virtually none of the studies has evaluated incident (new) cases, and therefore, the temporal relation between the factor of interest and disease status has not been properly determined. At the present time, we consider the prior studies as providing some evidence of concurrent factors or correlates of MGD, rather than as providing true risk factors for MGD. That being said, we reiterate that there appears to be some consistency for certain ophthalmic, systemic, and environmental factors associated with MGD. Possible demographic differences in MGD rates such as by age, sex, and race or ethnicity still need better delineation, especially relative to the undetermined incidence of the disease. There is evidence that CL wear may be associated with certain aspects of MGD, but this, too, needs much better delineation. For instance, it is well known that approximately 50% of contact lens wearers have frequent dry eye symptoms,
119 but it is not known how much of this may be due to MGD.
116 The effects of CL wear on the health of meibomian glands (atrophy), the excretion of the meibomian glands, or function of the lipid layer itself in terms of retarding evaporation need further study.
As summarized herein, There are several commonly used clinician-based assessment methods in addition to reporting symptoms that are generally used in the evaluation of MGD for outcome purposes. Each of these methods is limited by their subjectivity (and therefore, variability), which may lead to a lack of responsiveness as the disease progresses, with time or sensitivity between disease states (i.e., dry eye and MGD). Further, it is unclear how several of these outcomes truly relate to the nature of the disease. For instance, meibography is commonly used to image the meibomian glands (to determine atrophy), but it is unclear how this relates to the gland excretion or symptoms experienced by the patient. Yet, it is hard to argue that atrophy of the meibomian glands is not important in the disease process in some way. It is recommended that the community focus into the relation between the meibomian gland status (through meibography) and other clinical correlates and symptoms of MGD.
Similarly, it is well known that symptoms are a major component of MGD, but there is a paucity of data on the relative importance, including frequency and severity, of specific symptoms associated with the disease. Specific subjective outcome measures for MGD have not been properly established or validated. Related to this, it is unclear what role MGD has in the overall quality of life of an individual. It is recommended that the community focus attention on these patient-reported aspects of outcome development.
It is not entirely understood how the truly objective, analytical measures associated with the assessment of MGD relate to the disease in terms of its incidence (a biomarker, perhaps), clinical correlates (meibomian gland plugging, expressibility, and meibum quality), or subjective outcomes. This uncertainty is particularly true of the biochemistry of the lipid excretion of the meibomian gland in relation to other outcomes. It is recommended that the community try to focus more attention on better understanding these relationships (e.g., the relation between tear osmolarity and symptoms of MGD), in addition to developing a better understanding of potential biomarkers in MGD that may either help diagnostically or track changes in MGD with time or with treatment.
Finally, it is critically important that studies be undertaken that begin to establish the natural history of MGD and associated risk factors. There are many questions that could be answered in this regard. For instance, the time course of disease progression is uncertain, including the relation between true etiologic factors and the development of symptoms of disease. As mentioned, the relation between meibomian gland atrophy (gland loss) and symptom development is uncertain; for instance, it could be that some atrophy of the glands is normal and may not lead to patient symptoms or ocular surface damage. In addition, the actual source of the symptoms of MGD is not known (e.g., do they derive from the meibomian glands or the ocular surface?), nor has the primary contributing factor leading to their development been identified. Once atrophy is present and the patient develops symptoms, it may also be possible for the glands to return to their normal state (for instance, if gland loss is due to CL wear and the individual discontinues from CL wear), but this has not been studied to our knowledge. Further, associated morbidities that may occur after the onset of MGD have not been established with quantitative estimates. This includes, for example, correlates such as the visual impact of the disease or the potential susceptibility of patients with MGD to ocular surface infection. Even the relation and cross-correlation between MGD and dry eye disease is not well understood. For instance, is MGD a risk factor or cause of dry eye disease? Or might dry eye disease be a risk factor or cause of MGD? What is the time course (temporal relation) for the development of these common comorbidities? As noted by Lemp and Nichols
120 in their study of those individuals who had been diagnosed with either MGD or dry eye disease, 40% had been diagnosed with both MGD and dry eye disease. Further, the patient-reported symptoms between those with MGD or dry eye disease were correspondingly similar, with limited exceptions.