Pooyan Kazemian1, Mariel S Lavieri2, Mark P Van Oyen2, Chris Andrews3, Joshua D Stein4. 1. Medical Practice Evaluation Center, Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan School of Engineering, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 4. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: jdstein@med.umich.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To generate personalized forecasts of how patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) experience disease progression at different intraocular pressure (IOP) levels to aid clinicians with setting personalized target IOPs. DESIGN: Secondary analyses using longitudinal data from 2 randomized controlled trials. PARTICIPANTS: Participants with moderate or advanced OAG from the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS) or the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS). METHODS: By using perimetric and tonometric data from trial participants, we developed and validated Kalman Filter (KF) models for fast-, slow-, and nonprogressing patients with OAG. The KF can generate personalized and dynamically updated forecasts of OAG progression under different target IOP levels. For each participant, we determined how mean deviation (MD) would change if the patient maintains his/her IOP at 1 of 7 levels (6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, or 24 mmHg) over the next 5 years. We also model and predict changes to MD over the same time horizon if IOP is increased or decreased by 3, 6, and 9 mmHg from the level attained in the trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Personalized estimates of the change in MD under different target IOP levels. RESULTS:A total of 571 participants (mean age, 64.2 years; standard deviation, 10.9) were followed for a mean of 6.5 years (standard deviation, 2.8). Our models predicted that, on average, fast progressors would lose 2.1, 6.7, and 11.2 decibels (dB) MD under target IOPs of 6, 15, and 24 mmHg, respectively, over 5 years. In contrast, on average, slow progressors would lose 0.8, 2.1, and 4.1 dB MD under the same target IOPs and time frame. When using our tool to quantify the OAG progression dynamics for all 571 patients, we found no statistically significant differences over 5 years between progression for black versus white, male versus female, and CIGTS versus AGIS participants under different target IOPs (P > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first clinical decision-making tool that generates personalized forecasts of the trajectory of OAG progression at different target IOP levels. This approach can help clinicians determine appropriate, personalized target IOPs for patients with OAG.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To generate personalized forecasts of how patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) experience disease progression at different intraocular pressure (IOP) levels to aid clinicians with setting personalized target IOPs. DESIGN: Secondary analyses using longitudinal data from 2 randomized controlled trials. PARTICIPANTS: Participants with moderate or advanced OAG from the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS) or the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS). METHODS: By using perimetric and tonometric data from trial participants, we developed and validated Kalman Filter (KF) models for fast-, slow-, and nonprogressing patients with OAG. The KF can generate personalized and dynamically updated forecasts of OAG progression under different target IOP levels. For each participant, we determined how mean deviation (MD) would change if the patient maintains his/her IOP at 1 of 7 levels (6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, or 24 mmHg) over the next 5 years. We also model and predict changes to MD over the same time horizon if IOP is increased or decreased by 3, 6, and 9 mmHg from the level attained in the trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Personalized estimates of the change in MD under different target IOP levels. RESULTS: A total of 571 participants (mean age, 64.2 years; standard deviation, 10.9) were followed for a mean of 6.5 years (standard deviation, 2.8). Our models predicted that, on average, fast progressors would lose 2.1, 6.7, and 11.2 decibels (dB) MD under target IOPs of 6, 15, and 24 mmHg, respectively, over 5 years. In contrast, on average, slow progressors would lose 0.8, 2.1, and 4.1 dB MD under the same target IOPs and time frame. When using our tool to quantify the OAG progression dynamics for all 571 patients, we found no statistically significant differences over 5 years between progression for black versus white, male versus female, and CIGTS versus AGIS participants under different target IOPs (P > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first clinical decision-making tool that generates personalized forecasts of the trajectory of OAG progression at different target IOP levels. This approach can help clinicians determine appropriate, personalized target IOPs for patients with OAG.
Authors: J G Bogaarts; E D Gommer; D M W Hilkman; V H J M van Kranen-Mastenbroek; J P H Reulen Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Carlos Gustavo De Moraes; Jessica V Jasien; Sonja Simon-Zoula; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: John P Cunningham; Paul Nuyujukian; Vikash Gilja; Cindy A Chestek; Stephen I Ryu; Krishna V Shenoy Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2010-10-13 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Sayoko E Moroi; David M Reed; David S Sanders; Ahmed Almazroa; Lawrence Kagemann; Neil Shah; Nakul Shekhawat; Julia E Richards Journal: Curr Opin Ophthalmol Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 3.761
Authors: Aakriti G Shukla; C Gustavo De Moraes; George A Cioffi; Christopher A Girkin; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill; Jeffrey M Liebmann Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Gian-Gabriel P Garcia; Koji Nitta; Mariel S Lavieri; Chris Andrews; Xiang Liu; Elizabeth Lobaza; Mark P Van Oyen; Kazuhisa Sugiyama; Joshua D Stein Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-10-16 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Joanne C Wen; Cecilia S Lee; Pearse A Keane; Sa Xiao; Ariel S Rokem; Philip P Chen; Yue Wu; Aaron Y Lee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Yosuke Tanigawa; Michael Wainberg; Juha Karjalainen; Tuomo Kiiskinen; Guhan Venkataraman; Susanna Lemmelä; Joni A Turunen; Robert R Graham; Aki S Havulinna; Markus Perola; Aarno Palotie; Mark J Daly; Manuel A Rivas Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 5.917
Authors: Daniel Shu Wei Ting; Louis R Pasquale; Lily Peng; John Peter Campbell; Aaron Y Lee; Rajiv Raman; Gavin Siew Wei Tan; Leopold Schmetterer; Pearse A Keane; Tien Yin Wong Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 4.638