PURPOSE: We evaluated Progression of Patterns (POP) for its ability to identify progression of glaucomatous visual field (VF) defects. METHODS: POP uses variational Bayesian independent component mixture model (VIM), a machine learning classifier (MLC) developed previously. VIM separated Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) VFs from a set of 2,085 normal and glaucomatous eyes into nine axes (VF patterns): seven glaucomatous. Stable glaucoma was simulated in a second set of 55 patient eyes with five VFs each, collected within four weeks. A third set of 628 eyes with 4,186 VFs (mean ± SD of 6.7 ± 1.7 VFs over 4.0 ± 1.4 years) was tested for progression. Tested eyes were placed into suspect and glaucoma categories at baseline, based on VFs and disk stereoscopic photographs; a subset of eyes had stereophotographic evidence of progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy (PGON). Each sequence of fields was projected along seven VIM glaucoma axes. Linear regression (LR) slopes generated from projections onto each axis yielded a degree of confidence (DOC) that there was progression. At 95% specificity, progression cutoffs were established for POP, visual field index (VFI), and mean deviation (MD). Guided progression analysis (GPA) was also compared. RESULTS: POP identified a statistically similar number of eyes (P > 0.05) as progressing compared with VFI, MD, and GPA in suspects (3.8%, 2.7%, 5.6%, and 2.9%, respectively), and more eyes than GPA (P = 0.01) in glaucoma (16.0%, 15.3%, 12.0%, and 7.3%, respectively), and more eyes than GPA (P = 0.05) in PGON eyes (26.3%, 23.7%, 27.6%, and 14.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: POP, with its display of DOC of progression and its identification of progressing VF defect pattern, adds to the information available to the clinician for detecting VF progression.
PURPOSE: We evaluated Progression of Patterns (POP) for its ability to identify progression of glaucomatous visual field (VF) defects. METHODS: POP uses variational Bayesian independent component mixture model (VIM), a machine learning classifier (MLC) developed previously. VIM separated Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) VFs from a set of 2,085 normal and glaucomatous eyes into nine axes (VF patterns): seven glaucomatous. Stable glaucoma was simulated in a second set of 55 patient eyes with five VFs each, collected within four weeks. A third set of 628 eyes with 4,186 VFs (mean ± SD of 6.7 ± 1.7 VFs over 4.0 ± 1.4 years) was tested for progression. Tested eyes were placed into suspect and glaucoma categories at baseline, based on VFs and disk stereoscopic photographs; a subset of eyes had stereophotographic evidence of progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy (PGON). Each sequence of fields was projected along seven VIM glaucoma axes. Linear regression (LR) slopes generated from projections onto each axis yielded a degree of confidence (DOC) that there was progression. At 95% specificity, progression cutoffs were established for POP, visual field index (VFI), and mean deviation (MD). Guided progression analysis (GPA) was also compared. RESULTS: POP identified a statistically similar number of eyes (P > 0.05) as progressing compared with VFI, MD, and GPA in suspects (3.8%, 2.7%, 5.6%, and 2.9%, respectively), and more eyes than GPA (P = 0.01) in glaucoma (16.0%, 15.3%, 12.0%, and 7.3%, respectively), and more eyes than GPA (P = 0.05) in PGON eyes (26.3%, 23.7%, 27.6%, and 14.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: POP, with its display of DOC of progression and its identification of progressing VF defect pattern, adds to the information available to the clinician for detecting VF progression.
Authors: Lyne Racette; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Linda M Zangwill; Sonia Jain; Lida M Becerra; Felipe A Medeiros; Christopher Bowd; Robert N Weinreb; Catherine Boden; Pamela A Sample Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2010-05
Authors: Nicholas G Strouthidis; Andrew Scott; Neena M Peter; David F Garway-Heath Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Michael H Goldbaum; Gil-Jin Jang; Chris Bowd; Jiucang Hao; Linda M Zangwill; Jeffrey Liebmann; Christopher Girkin; Tzyy-Ping Jung; Robert N Weinreb; Pamela A Sample Journal: Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc Date: 2009-12
Authors: Allison N McCoy; Harry A Quigley; Jiangxia Wang; Neil R Miller; Prem S Subramanian; Pradeep Y Ramulu; Michael V Boland Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Pooyan Kazemian; Jonathan E Helm; Mariel S Lavieri; Joshua D Stein; Mark P Van Oyen Journal: Prod Oper Manag Date: 2018-11-16 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Siamak Yousefi; Michael H Goldbaum; Madhusudhanan Balasubramanian; Felipe A Medeiros; Linda M Zangwill; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Robert N Weinreb; Christopher Bowd Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2014-04-01 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Hassan Muhammad; Thomas J Fuchs; Nicole De Cuir; Carlos G De Moraes; Dana M Blumberg; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch; Donald C Hood Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Siamak Yousefi; Michael H Goldbaum; Ehsan S Varnousfaderani; Akram Belghith; Tzyy-Ping Jung; Felipe A Medeiros; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Christopher Bowd Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Christopher Bowd; Robert N Weinreb; Madhusudhanan Balasubramanian; Intae Lee; Giljin Jang; Siamak Yousefi; Linda M Zangwill; Felipe A Medeiros; Christopher A Girkin; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Michael H Goldbaum Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-01-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Siamak Yousefi; Madhusudhanan Balasubramanian; Michael H Goldbaum; Felipe A Medeiros; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Christopher Bowd Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 3.283