Rongxuan Lim1, Mieran Sethi2, Ana M S Morley3. 1. Nationally Commissioned Xeroderma Pigmentosum Service, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Department of Ophthalmology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: limrongxuan@gmail.com. 2. Nationally Commissioned Xeroderma Pigmentosum Service, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; King's College London, Kings Health Partners, Division of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, St John's Institute of Dermatology, Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 3. Nationally Commissioned Xeroderma Pigmentosum Service, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Department of Ophthalmology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To document the ocular manifestations of xeroderma pigmentosum (XP), presenting via the United Kingdom (UK) XP service, and to analyze the correlations between XP genotype and ophthalmic phenotype. DESIGN: Prospective observational case series. SUBJECTS: Eighty-nine patients seen by the UK Nationally Commissioned XP Service, from April 2010 to December 2014, with a genetically confirmed diagnosis of XP. METHODS: Patients underwent a full ophthalmic examination at each visit. Clinical features from both eyes were recorded on a standard proforma. The most recent assessments were analyzed. A 2-tailed Fisher exact test was used to assess for differences in ocular features between patients in XP subgroups with impaired transcription coupled nucleotide excision repair (TC-NER) (category 1: XP-A, B, D, F, and G) and preserved TC-NER (category 2: XP-C, E, and V). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lid and periocular abnormalities, ocular surface pathologies, neuro-ophthalmologic abnormalities, lens and retinal abnormalities, and visual acuity (VA). RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of XP patients in our cohort had ocular involvement, with 65% describing photophobia. The most common abnormalities were in the periocular skin and ocular surface, including interpalpebral conjunctival melanosis (44%) and conjunctival injection (43%). Eleven percent of patients had required treatment for periocular cancers and 2% for ocular surface cancers. The most common neuro-ophthalmologic finding was minimal pupillary reaction to light (25%). Patients in category 2 had significantly more ocular surface abnormalities than patients in category 1, including a greater proportion of conjunctival injection (P = 0.003), conjunctival corkscrew vessels (P < 0.001), corneal scarring (P = 0.01) and pingueculae under the age of 50 (P = 0.02). Meanwhile, patients in category 1 had a higher proportion of poorly reactive pupils (P < 0.001) and abnormal ocular movements (P = 0.03) compared with those in category 2. Five patients (6%) presented to ophthalmologists with ocular surface signs related to XP, before any formal diagnosis of XP was made. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of XP patients have ocular involvement. Regular examination by an ophthalmologist is essential, especially in screening for eyelid and ocular surface tumors. The ocular phenotype-genotype segregation within XP patients suggests that XP is a heterogeneous and complex disease. With further study, we hope to offer these patients more individualized patient care.
PURPOSE: To document the ocular manifestations of xeroderma pigmentosum (XP), presenting via the United Kingdom (UK) XP service, and to analyze the correlations between XP genotype and ophthalmic phenotype. DESIGN: Prospective observational case series. SUBJECTS: Eighty-nine patients seen by the UK Nationally Commissioned XP Service, from April 2010 to December 2014, with a genetically confirmed diagnosis of XP. METHODS: Patients underwent a full ophthalmic examination at each visit. Clinical features from both eyes were recorded on a standard proforma. The most recent assessments were analyzed. A 2-tailed Fisher exact test was used to assess for differences in ocular features between patients in XP subgroups with impaired transcription coupled nucleotide excision repair (TC-NER) (category 1: XP-A, B, D, F, and G) and preserved TC-NER (category 2: XP-C, E, and V). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lid and periocular abnormalities, ocular surface pathologies, neuro-ophthalmologic abnormalities, lens and retinal abnormalities, and visual acuity (VA). RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of XP patients in our cohort had ocular involvement, with 65% describing photophobia. The most common abnormalities were in the periocular skin and ocular surface, including interpalpebral conjunctival melanosis (44%) and conjunctival injection (43%). Eleven percent of patients had required treatment for periocular cancers and 2% for ocular surface cancers. The most common neuro-ophthalmologic finding was minimal pupillary reaction to light (25%). Patients in category 2 had significantly more ocular surface abnormalities than patients in category 1, including a greater proportion of conjunctival injection (P = 0.003), conjunctival corkscrew vessels (P < 0.001), corneal scarring (P = 0.01) and pingueculae under the age of 50 (P = 0.02). Meanwhile, patients in category 1 had a higher proportion of poorly reactive pupils (P < 0.001) and abnormal ocular movements (P = 0.03) compared with those in category 2. Five patients (6%) presented to ophthalmologists with ocular surface signs related to XP, before any formal diagnosis of XP was made. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of XP patients have ocular involvement. Regular examination by an ophthalmologist is essential, especially in screening for eyelid and ocular surface tumors. The ocular phenotype-genotype segregation within XP patients suggests that XP is a heterogeneous and complex disease. With further study, we hope to offer these patients more individualized patient care.
Authors: Maria Claudia Schelini; Luis Fernando O B Chaves; Marcia C Toledo; Francisco W Rodrigues; Tauan de Oliveira; David L C Isaac; Marcos Avila Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-10-31 Impact factor: 1.909