Maximilian Pfau1, Moritz Lindner1,2, Lukas Goerdt1, Sarah Thiele1, Jennifer Nadal3, Matthias Schmid3, Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg1, SriniVas R Sadda4, Frank G Holz1, Monika Fleckenstein1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany. 2. The Nuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Sleep and Circadian Neuroscience Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 3. Institute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, University of Bonn, Germany. 4. Doheny Eye Institute, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To systematically compare the prognostic value of multiple shape-descriptive factors in the natural course of the disease. METHODS: A total of 296 eyes of 201 patients (female patients 130; mean age: 72.2 ± 13.08 years) with a median follow-up of 2.38 years from 2 prospective, noninterventional natural history studies (Fundus-Autofluorescence-in-Age-related-Macular-Degeneration [clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00393692], Directional-Spread-in-Geographic-Atrophy [NCT02051998]) were included in the analysis. Serial fundus autofluorescence images were annotated using semiautomated image analysis software to determine the lesion area, circularity, perimeter, and caliper diameters. These variables and the fundus autofluorescence phenotype were evaluated for prediction of the future square root progression rates using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: For the combined model, leave-one-out cross validation on patient level (Scenario 1: previously unknown patient) resulted in a goodness-to-fit (R value) of 0.244 and leave-one-out cross validation on visit level (Scenario 2: previous observation of the patient) in a R value of 0.391. This indicated that shape-descriptive factors could explain 24.4% of the variance in geographic atrophy progression in previously unknown patients and 39.1% in patients with previous observation. CONCLUSION: These findings confirm the relevance of shape-descriptive factors and previous progression as prognostic variables for geographic atrophy progression. However, a substantial part of the remaining variation in geographic atrophy progression seems to depend on other variables, some of which are visible in optical coherence tomography.
PURPOSE: To systematically compare the prognostic value of multiple shape-descriptive factors in the natural course of the disease. METHODS: A total of 296 eyes of 201 patients (female patients 130; mean age: 72.2 ± 13.08 years) with a median follow-up of 2.38 years from 2 prospective, noninterventional natural history studies (Fundus-Autofluorescence-in-Age-related-Macular-Degeneration [clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00393692], Directional-Spread-in-Geographic-Atrophy [NCT02051998]) were included in the analysis. Serial fundus autofluorescence images were annotated using semiautomated image analysis software to determine the lesion area, circularity, perimeter, and caliper diameters. These variables and the fundus autofluorescence phenotype were evaluated for prediction of the future square root progression rates using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: For the combined model, leave-one-out cross validation on patient level (Scenario 1: previously unknown patient) resulted in a goodness-to-fit (R value) of 0.244 and leave-one-out cross validation on visit level (Scenario 2: previous observation of the patient) in a R value of 0.391. This indicated that shape-descriptive factors could explain 24.4% of the variance in geographic atrophy progression in previously unknown patients and 39.1% in patients with previous observation. CONCLUSION: These findings confirm the relevance of shape-descriptive factors and previous progression as prognostic variables for geographic atrophy progression. However, a substantial part of the remaining variation in geographic atrophy progression seems to depend on other variables, some of which are visible in optical coherence tomography.
Authors: Diane L Wang; Julia Agee; Marco Mazzola; Riccardo Sacconi; Giuseppe Querques; Alan D Weinberg; R Theodore Smith Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2019-08-07
Authors: Flurin Cathomas; Leanne M Holt; Eric M Parise; Jia Liu; James W Murrough; Patrizia Casaccia; Eric J Nestler; Scott J Russo Journal: Neuron Date: 2022-02-18 Impact factor: 17.173
Authors: Maximilian Pfau; Leon von der Emde; Luis de Sisternes; Joelle A Hallak; Theodore Leng; Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg; Frank G Holz; Monika Fleckenstein; Daniel L Rubin Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Kevin J McHugh; Dian Li; Jay C Wang; Leon Kwark; Jessica Loo; Venkata Macha; Sina Farsiu; Leo A Kim; Magali Saint-Geniez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Janan Arslan; Kurt K Benke; Gihan Samarasinghe; Arcot Sowmya; Robyn H Guymer; Paul N Baird Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Maria Vittoria Cicinelli; Alessandro Rabiolo; Maria Brambati; Chiara Viganò; Francesco Bandello; Maurizio Battaglia Parodi Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2020-06-25 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Janan Arslan; Gihan Samarasinghe; Kurt K Benke; Arcot Sowmya; Zhichao Wu; Robyn H Guymer; Paul N Baird Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2020-10-26 Impact factor: 3.283