PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine classification criteria for cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis. DESIGN: Machine learning of cases with CMV retinitis and 4 other infectious posterior/ panuveitides. METHODS: Cases of infectious posterior/panuveitides were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a final database was constructed of cases achieving supermajority agreement on diagnosis using formal consensus techniques. Cases were split into a training set and a validation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used in the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassification rate among the infectious posterior/panuveitides. The resulting criteria were evaluated in the validation set. RESULTS: A total of 803 cases of infectious posterior/panuveitides, including 211 cases of CMV retinitis, were evaluated by machine learning. Key criteria for CMV retinitis included: 1) necrotizing retinitis with indistinct borders due to numerous small satellites; 2) evidence of immune compromise; and either 3) a characteristic clinical appearance, or 4) positive polymerase chain reaction assay results for CMV from an intraocular specimen. Characteristic appearances for CMV retinitis included: 1) wedge-shaped area of retinitis; 2) hemorrhagic retinitis; or 3) granular retinitis. Overall accuracy for infectious posterior/panuveitides was 92.1% in the training set and 93.3% (95% confidence interval: 88.2-96.3) in the validation set. The misclassification rates for CMV retinitis were 6.9% in the training set and 6.3% in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for CMV retinitis had a low misclassification rate and appeared to perform sufficiently well for use in clinical and translational research.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine classification criteria for cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis. DESIGN: Machine learning of cases with CMV retinitis and 4 other infectious posterior/ panuveitides. METHODS: Cases of infectious posterior/panuveitides were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a final database was constructed of cases achieving supermajority agreement on diagnosis using formal consensus techniques. Cases were split into a training set and a validation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used in the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassification rate among the infectious posterior/panuveitides. The resulting criteria were evaluated in the validation set. RESULTS: A total of 803 cases of infectious posterior/panuveitides, including 211 cases of CMV retinitis, were evaluated by machine learning. Key criteria for CMV retinitis included: 1) necrotizing retinitis with indistinct borders due to numerous small satellites; 2) evidence of immune compromise; and either 3) a characteristic clinical appearance, or 4) positive polymerase chain reaction assay results for CMV from an intraocular specimen. Characteristic appearances for CMV retinitis included: 1) wedge-shaped area of retinitis; 2) hemorrhagic retinitis; or 3) granular retinitis. Overall accuracy for infectious posterior/panuveitides was 92.1% in the training set and 93.3% (95% confidence interval: 88.2-96.3) in the validation set. The misclassification rates for CMV retinitis were 6.9% in the training set and 6.3% in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for CMV retinitis had a low misclassification rate and appeared to perform sufficiently well for use in clinical and translational research.
Authors: Douglas A Jabs; Alka Ahuja; Mark L Van Natta; Alice T Lyon; Steven Yeh; Ronald Danis Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Janet T Holbrook; Ryan Colvin; Mark L van Natta; Jennifer E Thorne; Mark Bardsley; Douglas A Jabs Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2011-07-13 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Rohit Aggarwal; Sarah Ringold; Dinesh Khanna; Tuhina Neogi; Sindhu R Johnson; Amy Miller; Hermine I Brunner; Rikke Ogawa; David Felson; Alexis Ogdie; Daniel Aletaha; Brian M Feldman Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: A G Palestine; M A Polis; M D De Smet; B F Baird; J Falloon; J A Kovacs; R T Davey; J J Zurlo; K M Zunich; M Davis Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1991-11-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Gary N Holland; Mark L Van Natta; David T Goldenberg; Rory Ritts; Ronald P Danis; Douglas A Jabs Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Jonathan D Krett; J David Beckham; Kenneth L Tyler; Amanda L Piquet; Lakshmi Chauhan; Carla J Wallace; Daniel M Pastula; Ronak K Kapadia Journal: Neurohospitalist Date: 2022-05-27