In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

[Q]: Context: The present study was undertaken to determine whether exposure of the sclera to prostaglandin (PG)F(2alpha) or to the PGF(2alpha) analogue latanoprost acid alters mRNA for matrix metalloproteinases.', 'Fifteen human eye bank eyes were studied. Circular pieces of sclera were either immediately preserved in a stabilization reagent or cultured in low-serum DMEM/F-12 medium. The cultures were treated for 24 hours with medium supplemented with PGF(2a), latanoprost acid, or vehicle. Total RNA was then isolated, and the expression of mRNA for matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1, -2, -3, -8, -9, -10, and -12 were determined by real-time PCR. All results were normalized according to the GAPDH mRNA in each sample. Altered mRNA expression after PG treatments also was evaluated with microarrays containing 19 MMP genes and 4 tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase (TIMP) genes.', 'Real-time PCR results showed that 24 hours of exposure to 100 nM PGF(2alpha) significantly increased mRNA for MMP-1 and -9 (P < 0.06 Wilcoxon test) and that exposure to 100 nM latanoprost acid significantly increased mRNA for MMP-9 (P < 0.06 Wilcoxon test). Array analysis demonstrated increases of MMP-3 and -10 mRNA after exposure to 100 nM latanoprost and further increases after exposure to 200 nM latanoprost. The array results also showed that latanoprost induced dose-dependent increases in the expression of TIMP-1, -2, and -3 mRNA in the scleral cultures.\Question: Do prostaglandin FP agonists alter metalloproteinase gene expression in sclera?
[A]: PGF(2alpha) and latanoprost acid induce coordinated alterations of MMP gene transcription in scleral organ cultures. These results indicate that PGs can directly trigger MMP gene transcription changes within the sclera. These changes support a role for increased MMPs in the enhancement of uveoscleral outflow that occurs after topical treatment with latanoprost.

[Q]: Context: To determine whether repeat administration of an adenovector (Ad) into the eye results in efficient gene delivery and to test whether transgenes can be expressed from an adenovector expression system in the presence of preexisting, neutralizing anti-Ad antibodies.', 'To assess the efficiency of repeated gene delivery of an adenovector expression system, C57Bl/6 mice received one, two, or three injections (intravitreal [IVT] or periocular [PO]) of AdNull.11D (empty cassette) at 2-week intervals, followed by a single AdLuciferase (AdL.11D) IVT or PO injection. Mice were killed approximately 24 hours after AdL.11D injection and the eyes were enucleated and stored until assayed. Serum samples were also analyzed to determine whether repeated IVT or PO injections lead to induction of neutralizing antibodies directed against an adenovector delivery system. To determine whether preexisting neutralizing anti-Ad antibodies would block transgene expression, mice were preimmunized with one, two, or three intramuscular (IM) injection(s) of AdNull.11D (1 x 10(9) particle units [pu]). Fourteen days later, when systemic anti-Ad antibody titers were expected to exist, mice were given a single AdL.11D injection (IVT or PO) and killed, and the eyes and serum collected.', 'These studies show that multiple injections at 2-week intervals with adenovectors (IM, IVT, or PO) did not prevent transgene expression in the eye. Moreover, measurement of neutralizing anti-Ad antibody titers revealed that measurable anti-Ad antibody titers in mice did not ablate transgene expression.\Question: Does repeated administration of adenovector in the eye result in efficient gene delivery?
[A]: These studies suggest that transgene expression after repeated adenovector administration into the eye is feasible and repeated injections, whether given IVT or PO, do not lead to an immediate increase in neutralizing anti-Ad antibody titers. Moreover, preimmunization of mice by systemic exposure to adenovector, does not block transgene expression in the eye. These studies indicate that repeat administration of adenovectors (IVT and PO) into the eye can be considered in designing future clinical trials and that the pre-existence of neutralizing anti-Ad antibodies probably does not mitigate activity.

[Q]: Context: The author addresses whether the face bow is irrelevant for all types of prosthetic work and for planning orthognathic surgery.', 'The author searched electronic databases to find studies whose investigators used the strongest clinical evidence (that is, randomized clinical trials) and studies whose investigators incorporated the use of cinefluorography. The author found 13 studies and 1 Internet video that provided strong evidence to support the irrelevancy of the face bow transfer.', 'Evidence indicates that the face bow has nothingto do with speech, the fit and comfort of the prostheses, ridge morphology, facial contours, the color ofthe teeth and denture bases, the arrangement of the artificial teeth, chewing efficiency stability, and the psychological aspects of prosthodontic treatment. The cinefluorographic example showed that there was no condylar axisof rotationduring functional activity, a sawing action of themandibular incisors during the incising oftoast andthemandible moving in a back and forth,rockingchair-like movement during functional activity.\Question: Is the face bow irrelevant for making prostheses and planning orthognathic surgery?
[A]:
Eliminating the face bow transfer reduces the patient's chair time and the dentist's overhead expenses. The author found evidence in the results ofrandomized controlled trials and an online video thatjustify eliminating the use and teaching of the133-year-old technique known as the face bow transfer.