R Bowman1,2, B Walters3, V Smith3, K L Prise3, S E Handley3,4, K Green3, K Mankad3,4, P O'Hare3, C Dahl3, M Jorgensen3, E Opocher3, D Hargrave3,4, D A Thompson3,4. 1. Great Ormond Street Hospital, Great Ormond Street NHS Foundation Trust, WC1N 3JH, London, England. richardbowman493@gmail.com. 2. University College London, Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, WC1N 1EH, London, England. richardbowman493@gmail.com. 3. Great Ormond Street Hospital, Great Ormond Street NHS Foundation Trust, WC1N 3JH, London, England. 4. University College London, Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, WC1N 1EH, London, England.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Optic pathway gliomas (OPGs) may cause progressive visual loss despite chemotherapy. Newer, less toxic treatments might be given earlier, depending on visual prognosis. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of visual evoked potentials (VEP) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS: A retrospective study of OPG patients (treated 2003-2017) was conducted. Primary outcome was PEDIG category visual acuity in better and worse eyes (good < = 0.2, moderate 0.3-0.6 and poor > = 0.7 logMAR). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of these outcomes. RESULTS: 60 patients (32 Neurofibromatosis type 1 [NF1] and 28 sporadic) had median presentation age 49 months (range 17-183) (NF1) and 27 months (range 4-92) (sporadic). Median follow up was 82 months (range 12-189 months). At follow up 24/32 (75%) of NF1 children and 14/28 (50%) of sporadic children had good better eye visual acuity and 11/32 (34%) of NF1 children and 15/28 (54%) of sporadics had poor worse eye acuity. Mean peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness predicted good better eye final acuity (OR 0.799, 95%CI 0.646-0.987, p = 0.038). Presenting with visual symptoms (OR 0.22 95% CI 0.001-0.508, p = 0.017) and poorer VEP scores (OR 2.35 95% CI 1.1-5.03, p = 0.027) predicted poor worse eye final acuity. 16 children had homonymous hemianopias at follow up, predicted by poor presenting binocular VEP score (OR 1.449 95%CI 1.052-1.995, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: We found that both RNFL thickness on OCT and VEP were useful in predicting future visual acuity and vision and potentially in planning treatment. We had a high prevalence of homonymous hemianopia.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Optic pathway gliomas (OPGs) may cause progressive visual loss despite chemotherapy. Newer, less toxic treatments might be given earlier, depending on visual prognosis. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of visual evoked potentials (VEP) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS: A retrospective study of OPG patients (treated 2003-2017) was conducted. Primary outcome was PEDIG category visual acuity in better and worse eyes (good < = 0.2, moderate 0.3-0.6 and poor > = 0.7 logMAR). Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of these outcomes. RESULTS: 60 patients (32 Neurofibromatosis type 1 [NF1] and 28 sporadic) had median presentation age 49 months (range 17-183) (NF1) and 27 months (range 4-92) (sporadic). Median follow up was 82 months (range 12-189 months). At follow up 24/32 (75%) of NF1 children and 14/28 (50%) of sporadic children had good better eye visual acuity and 11/32 (34%) of NF1 children and 15/28 (54%) of sporadics had poor worse eye acuity. Mean peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness predicted good better eye final acuity (OR 0.799, 95%CI 0.646-0.987, p = 0.038). Presenting with visual symptoms (OR 0.22 95% CI 0.001-0.508, p = 0.017) and poorer VEP scores (OR 2.35 95% CI 1.1-5.03, p = 0.027) predicted poor worse eye final acuity. 16 children had homonymous hemianopias at follow up, predicted by poor presenting binocular VEP score (OR 1.449 95%CI 1.052-1.995, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: We found that both RNFL thickness on OCT and VEP were useful in predicting future visual acuity and vision and potentially in planning treatment. We had a high prevalence of homonymous hemianopia.
Authors: Jason Fangusaro; Arzu Onar-Thomas; Tina Young Poussaint; Shengjie Wu; Azra H Ligon; Neal Lindeman; Anuradha Banerjee; Roger J Packer; Lindsay B Kilburn; Stewart Goldman; Ian F Pollack; Ibrahim Qaddoumi; Regina I Jakacki; Paul G Fisher; Girish Dhall; Patricia Baxter; Susan G Kreissman; Clinton F Stewart; David T W Jones; Stefan M Pfister; Gilbert Vezina; Jessica S Stern; Ashok Panigrahy; Zoltan Patay; Benita Tamrazi; Jeremy Y Jones; Sofia S Haque; David S Enterline; Soonmee Cha; Michael J Fisher; Laurence Austin Doyle; Malcolm Smith; Ira J Dunkel; Maryam Fouladi Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-05-28 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Susan E Yanni; Jingyun Wang; Christina S Cheng; Kelly I Locke; Yuquan Wen; David G Birch; Eileen E Birch Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2012-11-03 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Darren R Hargrave; Eric Bouffet; Uri Tabori; Alberto Broniscer; Kenneth J Cohen; Jordan R Hansford; Birgit Geoerger; Pooja Hingorani; Ira J Dunkel; Mark W Russo; Lillian Tseng; Kohinoor Dasgupta; Eduard Gasal; James A Whitlock; Mark W Kieran Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-12-15 Impact factor: 13.801
Authors: Nataliya Zhukova; Revathi Rajagopal; Adrienne Lam; Lee Coleman; Peter Shipman; Thomas Walwyn; Molly Williams; Michael Sullivan; Martin Campbell; Kanika Bhatia; Nicholas G Gottardo; Jordan R Hansford Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 4.452