Emily Y Chew1, Michael L Klein2, Traci E Clemons3, Elvira Agrón4, Rinki Ratnapriya5, Albert O Edwards6, Lars G Fritsche7, Anand Swaroop5, Gonçalo R Abecasis7. 1. Clinical Trials Branch, Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. Electronic address: echew@nei.nih.gov. 2. Casey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon. 3. The EMMES Corporation, Rockville, Maryland. 4. Clinical Trials Branch, Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 5. Neurobiology-Neurodegeneration and Repair Laboratory, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 6. Oregon Retina, LLP, Eugene, Oregon; Department of Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon; and Casey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon. 7. Center for Statistical Genetics, Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether genotypes at 2 major loci associated with late age-related macular degeneration (AMD), complement factor H (CFH) and age-related maculopathy susceptibility 2 (ARMS2), influence the relative benefits of Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) supplements. DESIGN: Unplanned retrospective evaluation of a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of vitamins and minerals for the treatment of AMD. SUBJECTS:AREDS participants (mean age, 69 years) who were at risk of developing late AMD and who were randomized to the 4 arms of AREDS supplement treatment. METHODS: Analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model to predict progression to late AMD (neovascular or central geographic atrophy). Statistical models, adjusted for age, gender, smoking status, and baseline AMD severity, were used to examine the influence of genotypes on the response to therapy with 4 randomly assigned arms of AREDS supplement components: placebo, antioxidants (vitamin C, vitamin E, β-carotene), zinc, or a combination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The influence of the genotype on the relative treatment response to the randomized components of the AREDS supplement, measured as progression to late AMD. RESULTS: Of the 1237 genotyped AREDS participants of white ethnicity, late AMD developed in 385 (31.1%) during the mean follow-up of 6.6 years. As previously demonstrated, CFH genotype (P = 0.005), ARMS2 (P< 0.0001), and supplement were associated individually with progression to late AMD. An interaction analysis found no evidence that the relative benefits of AREDS supplementation varied by genotype. Analysis of (1) CFH rs1061170 and rs1410996 combined with ARMS2 rs10490924 with the 4 randomly assigned arms of AREDS supplement and (2) analysis of the combination of CFH rs412852 and rs3766405 with ARMS2 c.372_815del443ins54 with the AREDS components resulted in no interaction (P = 0.06 and P = 0.45, respectively, before multiplicity adjustment). CONCLUSIONS: The AREDS supplements reduced the rate of AMD progression across all genotype groups. Furthermore, the genotypes at the CFH and ARMS2 loci did not statistically significantly alter the benefits of AREDS supplements. Genetic testing remains a valuable research tool, but these analyses suggest it provides no benefits in managing nutritional supplementation for patients at risk of late AMD.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether genotypes at 2 major loci associated with late age-related macular degeneration (AMD), complement factor H (CFH) and age-related maculopathy susceptibility 2 (ARMS2), influence the relative benefits of Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) supplements. DESIGN: Unplanned retrospective evaluation of a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of vitamins and minerals for the treatment of AMD. SUBJECTS:AREDSparticipants (mean age, 69 years) who were at risk of developing late AMD and who were randomized to the 4 arms of AREDS supplement treatment. METHODS: Analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model to predict progression to late AMD (neovascular or central geographic atrophy). Statistical models, adjusted for age, gender, smoking status, and baseline AMD severity, were used to examine the influence of genotypes on the response to therapy with 4 randomly assigned arms of AREDS supplement components: placebo, antioxidants (vitamin C, vitamin E, β-carotene), zinc, or a combination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The influence of the genotype on the relative treatment response to the randomized components of the AREDS supplement, measured as progression to late AMD. RESULTS: Of the 1237 genotyped AREDSparticipants of white ethnicity, late AMD developed in 385 (31.1%) during the mean follow-up of 6.6 years. As previously demonstrated, CFH genotype (P = 0.005), ARMS2 (P< 0.0001), and supplement were associated individually with progression to late AMD. An interaction analysis found no evidence that the relative benefits of AREDS supplementation varied by genotype. Analysis of (1) CFHrs1061170 and rs1410996 combined with ARMS2 rs10490924 with the 4 randomly assigned arms of AREDS supplement and (2) analysis of the combination of CFHrs412852 and rs3766405 with ARMS2c.372_815del443ins54 with the AREDS components resulted in no interaction (P = 0.06 and P = 0.45, respectively, before multiplicity adjustment). CONCLUSIONS: The AREDS supplements reduced the rate of AMD progression across all genotype groups. Furthermore, the genotypes at the CFH and ARMS2 loci did not statistically significantly alter the benefits of AREDS supplements. Genetic testing remains a valuable research tool, but these analyses suggest it provides no benefits in managing nutritional supplementation for patients at risk of late AMD.
Authors: Redmer van Leeuwen; M Kamran Ikram; Johannes R Vingerling; Jacqueline C M Witteman; Albert Hofman; Paulus T V M de Jong Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Christian Nischler; Hannes Oberkofler; Christoph Ortner; Doris Paikl; Wolfgang Riha; Nora Lang; Wolfgang Patsch; Stefan F Egger Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2011-01-14 Impact factor: 3.761
Authors: Nathan Congdon; Benita O'Colmain; Caroline C W Klaver; Ronald Klein; Beatriz Muñoz; David S Friedman; John Kempen; Hugh R Taylor; Paul Mitchell Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2004-04
Authors: Michael L Klein; Peter J Francis; Bernard Rosner; Robyn Reynolds; Sara C Hamon; Dennis W Schultz; Jurg Ott; Johanna M Seddon Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Milam A Brantley; Amy M Fang; Jennifer M King; Asheesh Tewari; Steven M Kymes; Alan Shiels Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: John Paul SanGiovanni; Emily Y Chew; Traci E Clemons; Frederick L Ferris; Gary Gensler; Anne S Lindblad; Roy C Milton; Johanna M Seddon; Robert D Sperduto Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2007-09
Authors: Demetrios G Vavvas; Kent W Small; Carl Awh; Brent W Zanke; Robert J Tibshirani; Rafal Kustra Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: S Scott Whitmore; Elliott H Sohn; Kathleen R Chirco; Arlene V Drack; Edwin M Stone; Budd A Tucker; Robert F Mullins Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Margaret M DeAngelis; Leah A Owen; Margaux A Morrison; Denise J Morgan; Mingyao Li; Akbar Shakoor; Albert Vitale; Sudha Iyengar; Dwight Stambolian; Ivana K Kim; Lindsay A Farrer Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 6.150