PURPOSE: To evaluate agreement in diabetic retinopathy severity classification by retina specialists performing ophthalmoscopy versus reading center (RC) grading of seven-field stereoscopic fundus photographs in a phase 2 clinical trial of intravitreal bevacizumab for center-involved diabetic macular edema. METHODS: Clinicians' grading scale used four levels: microaneurysms only, mild/moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), severe NPDR, and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or prior panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) or both. The RC scale used eight levels: microaneurysms only, mild NPDR, moderate NPDR, moderately severe NPDR, severe NPDR, mild PDR, moderate PDR, and high-risk PDR. Percent agreement and kappa statistic were defined by collapsing RC categories to match those used by clinicians. RESULTS: There was agreement in 89/118 eyes (75%) with kappa = 0.55 (95% confidence interval [0.41, 0.68]). In six eyes, disagreements were of potential substantial clinical importance: five eyes with subtle retinal neovascularization and one with a small preretinal hemorrhage identified only in photographs. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician grading of retinopathy severity had moderate agreement with RC grading and might be useful for placing eyes into broad baseline categories.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate agreement in diabetic retinopathy severity classification by retina specialists performing ophthalmoscopy versus reading center (RC) grading of seven-field stereoscopic fundus photographs in a phase 2 clinical trial of intravitreal bevacizumab for center-involved diabetic macular edema. METHODS: Clinicians' grading scale used four levels: microaneurysms only, mild/moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), severe NPDR, and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or prior panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) or both. The RC scale used eight levels: microaneurysms only, mild NPDR, moderate NPDR, moderately severe NPDR, severe NPDR, mild PDR, moderate PDR, and high-risk PDR. Percent agreement and kappa statistic were defined by collapsing RC categories to match those used by clinicians. RESULTS: There was agreement in 89/118 eyes (75%) with kappa = 0.55 (95% confidence interval [0.41, 0.68]). In six eyes, disagreements were of potential substantial clinical importance: five eyes with subtle retinal neovascularization and one with a small preretinal hemorrhage identified only in photographs. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician grading of retinopathy severity had moderate agreement with RC grading and might be useful for placing eyes into broad baseline categories.
Authors: J A Pugh; J M Jacobson; W A Van Heuven; J A Watters; M R Tuley; D R Lairson; R J Lorimor; A S Kapadia; R Velez Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 1993-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Maria José Martinez-Zapata; Arturo J Martí-Carvajal; Ivan Solà; José I Pijoán; José A Buil-Calvo; Josep A Cordero; Jennifer R Evans Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-11-24
Authors: Sapna S Gangaputra; Michael M Altaweel; Qian Peng; David S Friedman; P Kumar Rao; C Stephen Foster; Rosa Y Kim; Susan B Reed; Sunil K Srivastava; Ira G Wong; John H Kempen Journal: Ocul Immunol Inflamm Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 3.070
Authors: Sapna Gangaputra; James F Lovato; Larry Hubbard; Matthew D Davis; Barbara A Esser; Walter T Ambrosius; Emily Y Chew; Craig Greven; Letitia H Perdue; Wai T Wong; Audree Condren; Charles P Wilkinson; Elvira Agrón; Sharon Adler; Ronald P Danis Journal: Retina Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Alexander J Brucker; Haijing Qin; Andrew N Antoszyk; Roy W Beck; Neil M Bressler; David J Browning; Michael J Elman; Adam R Glassman; Jeffrey G Gross; Craig Kollman; John A Wells Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2009-02
Authors: Ingrid U Scott; Barbara A Blodi; Michael S Ip; Paul C Vanveldhuisen; Neal L Oden; Clement K Chan; Victor Gonzalez Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 12.079