ReviewMolecular diagnosis & therapy2011
Genetic predictors of response to photodynamictherapy.
Review in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex- and age-specific associations ofAnnals of medicine · 2026Article
- Epigenetic role of LINE-1 methylation and key genes in pregnancy maintenance.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Host genetics impact on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced immunoglobulin levels and dynamics: The role ofFrontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Impact of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T polymorphism on the efficacy of photodynamic therapy in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Inherited genetic predispositions in F13A1 and F13B genes predict abdominal adhesion formation: identification of gender prognostic indicators.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Effect of Factor XIII-A G185T Polymorphism on Visual Prognosis after Photodynamic Therapy for Neovascular Macular Degeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2015Article
- Mechanism of inflammation in age-related macular degeneration.Mediators of inflammation · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Western countries, therapeutic management of patients affected by choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to different typologies of macular degeneration represents a major health care problem. Age-related macular degeneration is the disease most frequently associated with CNV development. Schematically, CNVs can be distinguished into classic and occult subtypes, which are characterized by variable natural history and different responsiveness to some therapeutic procedures. At present, the dramatic vision loss due to CNV can be mainly treated by two interventional strategies, which are utilizable in either single or combined modalities: photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (PDT-V), and intravitreal administration of drugs acting against vascular endothelial growth factor. The combined use of PDT-V and anti-angiogenic drugs represents one of the most promising strategies against neovascular macular degeneration, but it unavoidably results in an expensive increase in health resource utilization. However, the positive data from several studies serve as a basis for reconsidering the role of PDT-V, which has undergone a renaissance prompted by the need for a more rational therapeutic approach toward CNV. New pharmacogenetic knowledge of PDT-V points to exploratory prospects to optimize the clinical application of this intriguing photothrombotic procedure. In fact, a Medline search provides data regarding the role of several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) as genetic predictors of CNV responsiveness to PDT-V. Specifically, correlations between SNPs and different levels of PDT-V efficacy have been detected by examining the gene variants influencing (i) thrombo-coagulative pathways, i.e. methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) 677C>T (rs1801133), factor V (F5) 1691G>A (rs6025), prothrombin (F2) 20210G>A (rs1799963), and factor XIII-A (F13A1) 185G>T (rs5985); (ii) complement activation and/or inflammatory processes, i.e. complement factor H (CFH) 1277T>C (rs1061170), high-temperature requirement factor A1 (HTRA1) promoter -512G>A (rs11200638), and two variants of the C-reactive protein (CRP) gene (rs2808635 and rs876538); and (iii) production and bioavailability of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGFA -2578C>A [rs699947] and rs2146323). This article critically evaluates both the clinical plausibility and the opportunity to utilize the most important SNP-response interactions of PDT-V for an effective upgrade of the current anti-CNV therapeutic scenario. In addition, the pharmacogenetics of a very severe post-PDT-V adverse event, i.e. a decrease in acute vision, is briefly discussed. A comprehensive appraisal of the findings reviewed in this article should be carefully considered to design future trials aimed at verifying (after proper genotypic stratification of the enrolled patients) whether these innovative pharmacogenetic approaches will be able to improve the multifaceted interventional management of neovascular macular degeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.