Nayuta Yoshioka1, Barbara Zangerl1, Lisa Nivison-Smith1, Sieu K Khuu2, Bryan W Jones3, Rebecca L Pfeiffer3, Robert E Marc3, Michael Kalloniatis1. 1. Centre for Eye Health, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 2School of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2. School of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Moran Eye Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States.
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize macular ganglion cell layer (GCL) changes with age and provide a framework to assess changes in ocular disease. This study used data clustering to analyze macular GCL patterns from optical coherence tomography (OCT) in a large cohort of subjects without ocular disease. Methods: Single eyes of 201 patients evaluated at the Centre for Eye Health (Sydney, Australia) were retrospectively enrolled (age range, 20-85); 8 × 8 grid locations obtained from Spectralis OCT macular scans were analyzed with unsupervised classification into statistically separable classes sharing common GCL thickness and change with age. The resulting classes and gridwise data were fitted with linear and segmented linear regression curves. Additionally, normalized data were analyzed to determine regression as a percentage. Accuracy of each model was examined through comparison of predicted 50-year-old equivalent macular GCL thickness for the entire cohort to a true 50-year-old reference cohort. Results: Pattern recognition clustered GCL thickness across the macula into five to eight spatially concentric classes. F-test demonstrated segmented linear regression to be the most appropriate model for macular GCL change. The pattern recognition-derived and normalized model revealed less difference between the predicted macular GCL thickness and the reference cohort (average ± SD 0.19 ± 0.92 and -0.30 ± 0.61 μm) than a gridwise model (average ± SD 0.62 ± 1.43 μm). Conclusions: Pattern recognition successfully identified statistically separable macular areas that undergo a segmented linear reduction with age. This regression model better predicted macular GCL thickness. The various unique spatial patterns revealed by pattern recognition combined with core GCL thickness data provide a framework to analyze GCL loss in ocular disease.
Purpose: To characterize macular ganglion cell layer (GCL) changes with age and provide a framework to assess changes in ocular disease. This study used data clustering to analyze macular GCL patterns from optical coherence tomography (OCT) in a large cohort of subjects without ocular disease. Methods: Single eyes of 201 patients evaluated at the Centre for Eye Health (Sydney, Australia) were retrospectively enrolled (age range, 20-85); 8 × 8 grid locations obtained from Spectralis OCT macular scans were analyzed with unsupervised classification into statistically separable classes sharing common GCL thickness and change with age. The resulting classes and gridwise data were fitted with linear and segmented linear regression curves. Additionally, normalized data were analyzed to determine regression as a percentage. Accuracy of each model was examined through comparison of predicted 50-year-old equivalent macular GCL thickness for the entire cohort to a true 50-year-old reference cohort. Results: Pattern recognition clustered GCL thickness across the macula into five to eight spatially concentric classes. F-test demonstrated segmented linear regression to be the most appropriate model for macular GCL change. The pattern recognition-derived and normalized model revealed less difference between the predicted macular GCL thickness and the reference cohort (average ± SD 0.19 ± 0.92 and -0.30 ± 0.61 μm) than a gridwise model (average ± SD 0.62 ± 1.43 μm). Conclusions: Pattern recognition successfully identified statistically separable macular areas that undergo a segmented linear reduction with age. This regression model better predicted macular GCL thickness. The various unique spatial patterns revealed by pattern recognition combined with core GCL thickness data provide a framework to analyze GCL loss in ocular disease.
Authors: Tony Redmond; David F Garway-Heath; Margarita B Zlatkova; Roger S Anderson Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2010-07-29 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Christopher K S Leung; Cong Ye; Robert N Weinreb; Marco Yu; Gilda Lai; Dennis S Lam Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Laura E Downie; Kate M Hatzopoulos; Michael J Pianta; Algis J Vingrys; Jennifer L Wilkinson-Berka; Michael Kalloniatis; Erica L Fletcher Journal: J Comp Neurol Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 3.215
Authors: L A Kerrigan-Baumrind; H A Quigley; M E Pease; D F Kerrigan; R S Mitchell Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Teresa C Chen; Barry Cense; Joan W Miller; Peter A D Rubin; Daniel G Deschler; Evangelos S Gragoudas; Johannes F de Boer Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Janelle Tong; Jack Phu; Sieu K Khuu; Nayuta Yoshioka; Agnes Y Choi; Lisa Nivison-Smith; Robert E Marc; Bryan W Jones; Rebecca L Pfeiffer; Michael Kalloniatis; Barbara Zangerl Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-05-10 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Yuqing Deng; Huijuan Wang; Ava-Gaye Simms; Huiling Hu; Juan Zhang; Giovana Rosa Gameiro; Tatjana Rundek; Joseph F Signorile; Bonnie E Levin; Jin Yuan; Jianhua Wang; Hong Jiang Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2022-06
Authors: Matt Trinh; Michael Kalloniatis; David Alonso-Caneiro; Lisa Nivison-Smith Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2022-05-02 Impact factor: 4.925
Authors: Jack Phu; Sieu K Khuu; Lisa Nivison-Smith; Barbara Zangerl; Agnes Yiu Jeung Choi; Bryan W Jones; Rebecca L Pfeiffer; Robert E Marc; Michael Kalloniatis Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 4.799