Trial reportOphthalmology2013
Inclusion of genotype with fundus phenotype improves accuracy of predicting choroidal neovascularization and geographic atrophy.
Trial report in Ophthalmology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship between CCL2 gene 2518A/G (rs1024611) polymorphism and age-related macular degeneration susceptibility: meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.International ophthalmology · 2024Pooled it
- Biomarkers for Nonexudative Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Relevance for Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2021Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence-driven diagnosis for age-related macular degeneration bridging pathology and engineering: a survey.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
- A proteogenomic signature of age-related macular degeneration in blood.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Simple Vision Function Tests that Distinguish Eyes with Early to Intermediate Age-related Macular Degeneration.Ophthalmic epidemiology · 2021Article
- AMD Genetics: Methods and Analyses for Association, Progression, and Prediction.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021Review
- Macular retinal thickness differs markedly in age-related macular degeneration driven by risk polymorphisms on chromosomes 1 and 10.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Risk factors for progression of age-related macular degeneration.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2020Review
- Genetics and genetic testing for age-related macular degeneration.Eye (London, England) · 2018Review
- Genome-wide analysis of disease progression in age-related macular degeneration.Human molecular genetics · 2018Article
- Genetics of age-related macular degeneration (AMD).Human molecular genetics · 2017Review
- Bivariate Analysis of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Progression Using Genetic Risk Scores.Genetics · 2017Article
- Article
- Early and intermediate age-related macular degeneration: update and clinical review.Clinical interventions in aging · 2017Review
- Progression Rate From Intermediate to Advanced Age-Related Macular Degeneration Is Correlated With the Number of Risk Alleles at the CFH Locus.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2016Article
- Age-related macular degeneration: genome-wide association studies to translation.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Review
- The Application of Genetic Risk Scores in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2016Review
- A Validated Phenotyping Algorithm for Genetic Association Studies in Age-related Macular Degeneration.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: current state-of-the-art care for optimizing visual outcomes and therapies in development.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2015Review
- Nature and nurture- genes and environment- predict onset and progression of macular degeneration.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe accuracy of predicting conversion from early-stage age-related macular degeneration (AMD) to the advanced stages of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) or geographic atrophy (GA) was evaluated to determine whether inclusion of clinically relevant genetic markers improved accuracy beyond prediction using phenotypic risk factors alone.
designCohort study.
participantsWhite, non-Hispanic subjects participating in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) sponsored by the National Eye Institute consented to provide a genetic specimen. Of 2415 DNA specimens available, 940 were from disease-free subjects and 1475 were from subjects with early or intermediate AMD.
methodsDNA specimens from study subjects were genotyped for 14 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes shown previously to associate with CNV: ARMS2, CFH, C3, C2, FB, CFHR4, CFHR5, and F13B. Clinical demographics and established disease associations, including age, sex, smoking status, body mass index (BMI), AREDS treatment category, and educational level, were evaluated. Four multivariate logistic models (phenotype; genotype; phenotype + genotype; and phenotype + genotype + demographic + environmental factors) were tested using 2 end points (CNV, GA). Models were fitted using Cox proportional hazards regression to use time-to-disease onset data.
main outcome measuresBrier score (measure of accuracy) was used to identify the model with the lowest prediction error in the training set. The most accurate model was subjected to independent statistical validation, and final model performance was described using area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) or C-statistic.
resultsThe CNV prediction models that combined genotype with phenotype with or without age and smoking revealed superior performance (C-statistic = 0.96) compared with the phenotype model based on the simplified severity scale and the presence of CNV in the nonstudy eye (C-statistic = 0.89; P<0.01). For GA, the model that combined genotype with phenotype demonstrated the highest performance (AUC = 0.94). Smoking status and ARMS2 genotype had less of an impact on the prediction of GA compared with CNV.
conclusionsInclusion of genotype assessment improves CNV prediction beyond that achievable with phenotype alone and may improve patient management. Separate assessments should be used to predict progression to CNV and GA because genetic markers and smoking status do not equally predict both end points. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.
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.