ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2014
The occurrence and proposed significance of Schnabel cavernous degeneration in uveal melanoma.
Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- SD-OCT-histopathologic correlation in Schnabel's cavernous optic nerve atrophy.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
importanceSchnabel cavernous degeneration (SCD) has been observed in eyes with uveal melanoma (UM), but, to our knowledge, a definitive study establishing the association between SCD and UM has not been conducted.
objectiveTo explore an association between SCD and UM. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsA historical cohort analysis was performed using histologic slides and related clinical records of cases from the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study and Eye Pathology Laboratory at the University of Wisconsin, including 1985 UM eyes, 517 eye bank eyes, and 155 enucleated glaucomatous eyes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prevalence of SCD was calculated and compared between each group; subgroup analysis was also conducted of eyes with and without SCD for the prevalence of glaucoma.
resultsSchnabel cavernous degeneration was seen in 17 (0.9%) UM eyes, 9 (1.7%) eye bank eyes, and 2 (1.3%) enucleated glaucomatous eyes. No difference was detected between the prevalence of SCD in UM eyes and eye bank eyes (odds ratio [OR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.22-1.10) or enucleated glaucomatous eyes (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.15-2.89). Subgroup analysis, performed on 421 UM eyes, provided sufficient clinical information to definitively establish the presence or absence of glaucoma. Of the 95 (22.6%) eyes with glaucoma, 11 (11.6%) revealed histopathologic evidence of SCD. Compared with enucleated end-stage glaucoma eyes, this represents a 10-fold increase in SCD in UM eyes with glaucoma (OR, 10.10; 95% CI, 2.17-46.26). The prevalence of glaucoma in UM eyes with SCD, however, was respectively 7- and 15-fold higher than the prevalence of glaucoma in SCD-negative UM eyes (OR, 6.98; 95% CI, 2.51-19.43) and SCD-positive eye bank eyes (OR, 14.67; 95% CI, 1.46-146.97). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although an association between SCD and UM was not confirmed, subgroup analysis did reveal an increased incidence of SCD in eyes with both UM and glaucoma. This suggests that the occurrence of glaucoma may increase the risk of SCD in eyes with UM.
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.