Benjamin Y Xu1, Siqi Liang2, Anmol A Pardeshi3, Jacob Lifton4, Sasan Moghimi5, Juan Pablo Lewinger6, Rohit Varma7. 1. Roski Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: benjamin.xu@med.usc.edu. 2. Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 3. Roski Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 4. Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 5. Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Shiley Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. 6. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 7. Southern California Eye Institute, CHA Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess differences in ocular biometric measurements between primary angle closure suspect (PACS) eyes and primary angle closure (PAC) and primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) eyes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with primary angle closure disease (PACD) were identified from the Chinese American Eye Study, a population-based study in Los Angeles, California. METHODS: Patients previously underwent complete ocular examinations including gonioscopy and anterior segment (AS)-OCT imaging with the Tomey CASIA SS-1000 (Tomey Corporation). Four AS-OCT images were analyzed per eye. Averaged and sectoral measurements of biometric parameters, including angle recess area (ARA), trabecular iris space area (TISA), iris area, iris curvature, lens vault, anterior chamber depth, and anterior chamber area, were compared between early PACD (PACS) and late PACD (PAC and PACG) groups. Machine learning classifiers that attempt to differentiate between early and late PACD eyes were developed by applying different regression algorithms to a training dataset of sectoral parameter measurements. Classifier performance was assessed using an independent test dataset. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averaged and sectoral measurements of biometric parameters. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-eight eyes (231 PACS, 67 PAC or PACG) of 298 patients were analyzed. No difference was found in averaged biometric measurements between the 2 groups before (P > 0.09) or after (P > 0.14) adjusting for age and gender. Differences (P < 0.04) between the 2 groups were found for 11 sectoral parameter measurements, including ARA and TISA. The performance of machine learning classifiers developed using sectoral parameter measurements was poor on the independent test dataset for all regression algorithms (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.529-0.628). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in biometric measurements between subtypes of PACD eyes were small in a population-based cohort of Chinese Americans. The poor performance of classifiers based on these measurements highlights potential challenges of developing quantitative methods to detect late PACD.
PURPOSE: To assess differences in ocular biometric measurements between primary angle closure suspect (PACS) eyes and primary angle closure (PAC) and primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) eyes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with primary angle closure disease (PACD) were identified from the Chinese American Eye Study, a population-based study in Los Angeles, California. METHODS: Patients previously underwent complete ocular examinations including gonioscopy and anterior segment (AS)-OCT imaging with the Tomey CASIA SS-1000 (Tomey Corporation). Four AS-OCT images were analyzed per eye. Averaged and sectoral measurements of biometric parameters, including angle recess area (ARA), trabecular iris space area (TISA), iris area, iris curvature, lens vault, anterior chamber depth, and anterior chamber area, were compared between early PACD (PACS) and late PACD (PAC and PACG) groups. Machine learning classifiers that attempt to differentiate between early and late PACD eyes were developed by applying different regression algorithms to a training dataset of sectoral parameter measurements. Classifier performance was assessed using an independent test dataset. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averaged and sectoral measurements of biometric parameters. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-eight eyes (231 PACS, 67 PAC or PACG) of 298 patients were analyzed. No difference was found in averaged biometric measurements between the 2 groups before (P > 0.09) or after (P > 0.14) adjusting for age and gender. Differences (P < 0.04) between the 2 groups were found for 11 sectoral parameter measurements, including ARA and TISA. The performance of machine learning classifiers developed using sectoral parameter measurements was poor on the independent test dataset for all regression algorithms (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.529-0.628). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in biometric measurements between subtypes of PACD eyes were small in a population-based cohort of Chinese Americans. The poor performance of classifiers based on these measurements highlights potential challenges of developing quantitative methods to detect late PACD.
Authors: Monisha E Nongpiur; Mingguang He; Nishani Amerasinghe; David S Friedman; Wan-Ting Tay; Mani Baskaran; Scott D Smith; Tien Yin Wong; Tin Aung Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Benjamin Y Xu; Michael Chiang; Shreyasi Chaudhary; Shraddha Kulkarni; Anmol A Pardeshi; Rohit Varma Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Benjamin Y Xu; Bruce Burkemper; Juan Pablo Lewinger; Xuejuan Jiang; Anmol A Pardeshi; Grace Richter; Mina Torres; Roberta McKean-Cowdin; Rohit Varma Journal: Ophthalmol Glaucoma Date: 2018-09-29
Authors: Sunita Radhakrishnan; Philip P Chen; Anna K Junk; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Teresa C Chen Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Sue-Wei Ho; Mani Baskaran; Ce Zheng; Tin A Tun; Shamira A Perera; Arun K Narayanaswamy; David S Friedman; Tin Aung Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2012-09-23 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Rohit Varma; Jie Sun; Mina Torres; Shuang Wu; Chunyi Hsu; Stanley Paul Azen; Roberta McKean-Cowdin Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Benjamin Y Xu; David S Friedman; Paul J Foster; Yu Jiang; Natalia Porporato; Anmol A Pardeshi; Yuzhen Jiang; Beatriz Munoz; Tin Aung; Mingguang He Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2021-10-08 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Jacob Lifton; Bruce Burkemper; Xuejuan Jiang; Anmol A Pardeshi; Grace Richter; Roberta McKean-Cowdin; Rohit Varma; Benjamin Y Xu Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-11-02 Impact factor: 5.488