Anthony P Khawaja1, Sharon Chua2, Pirro G Hysi3, Stelios Georgoulas2, Hannah Currant4, Tomas W Fitzgerald4, Ewan Birney4, Fang Ko2, Qi Yang5, Charles Reisman5, David F Garway-Heath2, Chris J Hammond6, Peng T Khaw2, Paul J Foster2, Praveen J Patel2, Nicholas Strouthidis7. 1. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: anthony.khawaja@gmail.com. 2. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom; Department of Twin Research & Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 4. European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 5. Topcon Advanced Biomedical Imaging Laboratory, Oakland, New Jersey. 6. Department of Ophthalmology, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 7. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom; Discipline of Clinical Ophthalmology and Eye Health, University of Sydney Medical School, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe and compare associations with macular retinal nerve fiber layer (mRNFL), ganglion cell complex (GCC), and ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) thicknesses in a large cohort. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: We included 42 044 participants in the UK Biobank. The mean age was 56 years. METHODS: Spectral-domain OCT macular images were segmented and analyzed. Corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) was measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer (Reichert, Corp., Buffalo, NY). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations with mean mRNFL, GCC, and GCIPL thicknesses. Factors examined were age, sex, ethnicity, height, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, alcohol intake, Townsend deprivation index, education level, diabetes status, spherical equivalent, and IOPcc. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thicknesses of mRNFL, GCC, and GCIPL. RESULTS: We identified several novel independent associations with thinner inner retinal thickness. Thinner inner retina was associated with alcohol intake (most significant for GCIPL: -0.46 μm for daily or almost daily intake compared with special occasion only or never [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61-0.30]; P = 1.1×10-8), greater social deprivation (most significant for GCIPL: -0.28 μm for most deprived quartile compared with least deprived quartile [95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14]; P = 6.6×10-5), lower educational attainment (most significant for mRNFL: -0.36 μm for less than O level compared with degree level [95% CI, -0.45 to 0.26]; P = 2.3×10-14), and nonwhite ethnicity (most significant for mRNFL comparing blacks with whites: -1.65 μm [95% CI, -1.86 to -1.43]; P = 2.4×10-50). Corneal-compensated intraocular pressure was associated most significantly with GCIPL (-0.04 μm/mmHg [95% CI, -0.05 to -0.03]; P = 4.0×10-10) and was not associated significantly with mRNFL (0.00 μm/mmHg [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.01]; P = 0.77). The variables examined explained a greater proportion of the variance of GCIPL (11%) than GCC (6%) or mRNFL (7%). CONCLUSIONS: The novel associations we identified may be important to consider when using inner retinal parameters as a diagnostic tool. Associations generally were strongest with GCIPL, particularly for IOP. This suggests that GCIPL may be the superior inner retinal biomarker for macular pathophysiologic processes and especially for glaucoma.
PURPOSE: To describe and compare associations with macular retinal nerve fiber layer (mRNFL), ganglion cell complex (GCC), and ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) thicknesses in a large cohort. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: We included 42 044 participants in the UK Biobank. The mean age was 56 years. METHODS: Spectral-domain OCT macular images were segmented and analyzed. Corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) was measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer (Reichert, Corp., Buffalo, NY). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations with mean mRNFL, GCC, and GCIPL thicknesses. Factors examined were age, sex, ethnicity, height, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, alcohol intake, Townsend deprivation index, education level, diabetes status, spherical equivalent, and IOPcc. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thicknesses of mRNFL, GCC, and GCIPL. RESULTS: We identified several novel independent associations with thinner inner retinal thickness. Thinner inner retina was associated with alcohol intake (most significant for GCIPL: -0.46 μm for daily or almost daily intake compared with special occasion only or never [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61-0.30]; P = 1.1×10-8), greater social deprivation (most significant for GCIPL: -0.28 μm for most deprived quartile compared with least deprived quartile [95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14]; P = 6.6×10-5), lower educational attainment (most significant for mRNFL: -0.36 μm for less than O level compared with degree level [95% CI, -0.45 to 0.26]; P = 2.3×10-14), and nonwhite ethnicity (most significant for mRNFL comparing blacks with whites: -1.65 μm [95% CI, -1.86 to -1.43]; P = 2.4×10-50). Corneal-compensated intraocular pressure was associated most significantly with GCIPL (-0.04 μm/mmHg [95% CI, -0.05 to -0.03]; P = 4.0×10-10) and was not associated significantly with mRNFL (0.00 μm/mmHg [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.01]; P = 0.77). The variables examined explained a greater proportion of the variance of GCIPL (11%) than GCC (6%) or mRNFL (7%). CONCLUSIONS: The novel associations we identified may be important to consider when using inner retinal parameters as a diagnostic tool. Associations generally were strongest with GCIPL, particularly for IOP. This suggests that GCIPL may be the superior inner retinal biomarker for macular pathophysiologic processes and especially for glaucoma.
Authors: Natascha Merten; Adam J Paulsen; A Alex Pinto; Yanjun Chen; Lauren K Dillard; Mary E Fischer; Guan-Hua Huang; Barbara E K Klein; Carla R Schubert; Karen J Cruickshanks Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Frank C T van der Heide; Yuri D Foreman; Iris W M Franken; Ronald M A Henry; Abraham A Kroon; Pieter C Dagnelie; Simone J P M Eussen; Tos T J M Berendschot; Jan S A G Schouten; Carroll A B Webers; Miranda T Schram; Carla J H van der Kallen; Marleen M J van Greevenbroek; Anke Wesselius; Casper G Schalkwijk; Nicolaas C Schaper; Martijn C G J Brouwers; Coen D A Stehouwer Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-10-22 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Parmita Mehta; Christine A Petersen; Joanne C Wen; Michael R Banitt; Philip P Chen; Karine D Bojikian; Catherine Egan; Su-In Lee; Magdalena Balazinska; Aaron Y Lee; Ariel Rokem Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-05-02 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Hannah Currant; Pirro Hysi; Tomas W Fitzgerald; Puya Gharahkhani; Pieter W M Bonnemaijer; Anne Senabouth; Alex W Hewitt; Denize Atan; Tin Aung; Jason Charng; Hélène Choquet; Jamie Craig; Peng T Khaw; Caroline C W Klaver; Michiaki Kubo; Jue-Sheng Ong; Louis R Pasquale; Charles A Reisman; Maciej Daniszewski; Joseph E Powell; Alice Pébay; Mark J Simcoe; Alberta A H J Thiadens; Cornelia M van Duijn; Seyhan Yazar; Eric Jorgenson; Stuart MacGregor; Chris J Hammond; David A Mackey; Janey L Wiggs; Paul J Foster; Praveen J Patel; Ewan Birney; Anthony P Khawaja Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 5.917
Authors: Adam J Paulsen; Alex Pinto; Natascha Merten; Yanjun Chen; Mary E Fischer; Guan-Hua Huang; Barbara E K Klein; Carla R Schubert; Karen J Cruickshanks Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 2.106
Authors: Sharon Y L Chua; Anthony P Khawaja; Andrew D Dick; James Morgan; Baljean Dhillon; Andrew J Lotery; Nicholas G Strouthidis; Charles Reisman; Tunde Peto; Peng T Khaw; Paul J Foster; Praveen J Patel Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Axel Petzold; Sharon Y L Chua; Anthony P Khawaja; Pearse A Keane; Peng T Khaw; Charles Reisman; Baljean Dhillon; Nicholas G Strouthidis; Paul J Foster; Praveen J Patel Journal: Brain Date: 2021-02-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Tyler Etheridge; Zhe Liu; Marine Nalbandyan; Spencer Cleland; Barbara A Blodi; Julie A Mares; Steven Bailey; Robert Wallace; Karen Gehrs; Lesley F Tinker; Ronald Gangnon; Amitha Domalpally Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 3.283