| Literature DB >> 17260092 |
Alvin Eisner1, Maureen D Toomey, Julie Falardeau, John R Samples, John T Vetto.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The main purpose of this study was to determine whether the optic cups of tamoxifen users and anastrozole users differ in size, with the cups of the tamoxifen users being smaller.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17260092 PMCID: PMC2045691 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-006-9486-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat ISSN: 0167-6806 Impact factor: 4.872
Demographic data for each of the subject groups
| Amenorrheic subjects 40–69 years old | Amenorrheic subjects 51–69 years old | Not amenorrheic, no breast cancer history | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anastrozole | Tamoxifen | Control, no breast cancer history | Anastrozole | Tamoxifen | Control, no breast cancer history | ||
| Age (years) | 58.2 (SD = 6.8) | 54.5 (SD = 5.2) | 57.2 (SD = 6.0) | 59.6 (SD = 5.4) | 56.5 (SD = 4.7) | 58.2 (SD = 5.1) | 48.0 (SD = 3.3) |
| IOP (mmHg) | 15.7 (SD = 2.9) | 15.5 (SD = 2.3) | 15.6 (SD = 2.9) | 15.7 (SD = 3.0) | 15.5 (SD = 2.5) | 15.7 (SD = 3.0) | 15.5 (SD = 2.3) |
| Duration of medication use (years) | 1.07 (SD = 0.45) | 1.31 (SD = 0.49) | 0 | 1.09 (SD = 0.47 | 1.36 (SD = 0.48) | 0 | 0 |
IOPs are from subjects’ test eyes only
ONH indices: between-group comparisons (subjects 40–69 years old)
| ANOVA (Kruskal–Wallis) | Anastrozole versus tamoxifen | Tamoxifen versus control | Anastrozole versus control | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cup volume | ||||
| Maximum cup depth | ||||
| Mean cup depth | ||||
| Cup area | ||||
| Cup/disk area ratio | ||||
| Cup shape | ||||
| Rim area | ||||
| Rim volume | ||||
| Disk area | ||||
| Mean RNFL thickness | ||||
| RNFL cross sectional area | ||||
| Height variation contour |
Left-most data column––P-values for the non-parametric ANOVAS (Kruskal–Wallis) across all three amenorrheic subject-groups simultaneously. Comparisons based on the results for the larger contour circles (see Methods). Right 3 columns––unadjusted P-values for the post hoc comparisons (Mann–Whitney U tests) between pairs of subject-groups. The top 6 rows of variables are for cup data, the next 2 rows are for rim data, and the bottom 4 rows are for disk-margin data. The bold entries signify P-values that are considered statistically significant. For the ANOVAS, statistical significance was considered to be p ≤ 0.05. For the post-hoc comparisons, a step-down Bonferroni approach was used, so that the first (i.e., the most significant) comparison required a significant ANOVA plus P ≤ 0.05/3, the second most significant comparison required a significant first comparison plus P ≤ 0.05/2, and the third most significant comparison required a significant second comparison plus P ≤ 0.05. “RNFL” signifies retinal nerve fiber layer thickness. The height variation contour signifies the maximal minus the minimal retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, as defined in the text
Fig. 1Graph of cup volume versus age for all amenorrheic subjects. Filled circles represent tamoxifen users, shaded circles represent anastrozole users, and unfilled circles represent control subjects
ONH indices: between-group comparisons (subjects 51–69 years old)
| ANOVA (Kruskal–Wallis) | Anastrozole versus tamoxifen | Tamoxifen versus control | Anastrozole versus control | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cup volume | ||||
| Maximum cup depth | ||||
| Mean cup depth | ||||
| Cup area | ||||
| Cup/disk area ratio | ||||
| Cup shape | ||||
| Rim area | ||||
| Rim volume | ||||
| Disk area | ||||
| Mean RNFL thickness | ||||
| RNFL cross sectional area | ||||
| Height variation contour |
Same as Table 2, except based on data from subjects older than 50 years)
ONH indices: means and standard errors of the mean, and medians (subjects 51–69 years old)
| Anastrozole | Tamoxifen | Control | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cup volume (mm3) | 0.107 ± 0.017 | 0.043 ± 0.015 | 0.090 ± 0.017 |
| 0.104 | 0.012 | 0.073 | |
| Maximum cup depth (mm) | 0.611 ± 0.047 | 0.423 ± 0.040 | 0.559 ± 0.040 |
| 0.591 | 0.378 | 0.594 | |
| Mean cup depth (mm) | 0.207 ± 0.017 | 0.145 ± 0.014 | 0.189 ± 0.014 |
| 0.206 | 0.130 | 0.198 | |
| Cup area (mm2) | 0.476 ± 0.059 | 0.275 ± 0.050 | 0.423 ± 0.057 |
| 0.523 | 0.139 | 0.385 | |
| Cup/disk area ratio | 0.207 ± 0.022 | 0.123 ± 0.021 | 0.193 ± 0.022 |
| 0.229 | 0.079 | 0.192 | |
| Cup shape | −0.229 ± 0.015 | −0.199 ± 0.012 | −0.219 ± 0.013 |
| −0.229 | −0.205 | −0.210 | |
| Rim area (mm2) | 1.724 ± 0.066 | 1.895 ± 0.071 | 1.697 ± 0.061 |
| 1.797 | 1.867 | 1.732 | |
| Rim volume (mm3) | 0.453 ± 0.025 | 0.593 ± 0.042 | 0.475 ± 0.028 |
| 0.461 | 0.580 | 0.506 | |
| Disk area (mm2) | 2.200 ± 0.094 | 2.169 ± 0.074 | 2.120 ± 0.067 |
| 2.316 | 2.156 | 2.154 | |
| Mean RNFL thickness (mm) | 0.245 ± 0.010 | 0.264 ± 0.014 | 0.246 ± 0.008 |
| 0.246 | 0.262 | 0.242 | |
| RNFL cross sectional area (mm2) | 1.281 ± 0.059 | 1.366 ± 0.014 | 1.266 ± 0.049 |
| 1.282 | 1.335 | 0.242 | |
| Height variation contour (mm) | 0.359 ± 0.019 | 0.401 ± 0.019 | 0.383 ± 0.015 |
| 0.375 | 0.388 | 0.391 |
Fig. 2Box plot of cup volume for women older than 50 years for each of the three amenorrheic subject groups. For each group, the horizontal line inside the box represents that group’s median value. The bottom and top of the box represent the upper and lower hinges, respectively, i.e., the first and third quartiles between which lie 50% of all the values. The whiskers represent the range of values that fall within a distance D from the hinges, where D equals 1.5 times the inter-quartile range. Asterisks represent individual points that fall between a distance of D and 2D from the hinges. Open circles represent individual points that are more distant outliers
Fig. 6Same as Fig. 2, except that box plots are for rim volumes
Fig. 3Same as Fig. 2, except that box plots are for cup areas
Fig. 4Same as Fig. 2, except that box plots are for maximum cup depths
Fig. 5Same as Fig. 2, except that box plots are for cup/disk area ratios