Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28620652›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology. Retina

Visual and Morphologic Outcomes in Eyes with Hard Exudate in the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials.

Ebenezer Daniel, Juan E Grunwald, Benjamin J Kim, Maureen G Maguire, Glenn J Jaffe, Cynthia A Toth, Frederick L Ferris, Daniel F Martin, James Shaffer, Gui-Shuang Ying and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology. Retina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ebenezer DanielDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Juan E GrunwaldDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Benjamin J KimDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Maureen G MaguireDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Glenn J JaffeDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Cynthia A TothDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Frederick L FerrisDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Daniel F MartinDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
James ShafferDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Gui-Shuang YingDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States. Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States. National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT) Research Group
University of Pennsylvania · USDuke University · USCleveland Clinic · USNational Eye Institute · US

Funding

Coordinating Center for the Comparison of AMD Treatments TrialsU10EY017823 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAGUIRE, MAUREEN G · 2006 to 2012
$19.2M
Follow-up Study: Comparison of AMD Treatments Trial (CATT)U10EY023530 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAGUIRE, MAUREEN G · 2013 to 2016
$3.5M
Photograph Reading Center for the Comparison of AMD Treatment TrialsU10EY017826 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GRUNWALD, JUAN E · 2006 to 2013
$2.8M
Comparison of AMD Treatment Trials-OCT Reading CenterU10EY017825 · NEI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JAFFE, GLENN · 2006 to 2013
$2.3M
Chair Grant for the Comparison of AMD Treatment TrialsU10EY017828 · NEI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI MARTIN, DANIEL F · 2006 to 2012
$1.9M
Secondary Data Analysis of the Data from Comparison of AMD Treatments TrialsR21EY023689 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI YING, GUI-SHUANG · 2013 to 2014
$436k
NEI NIH HHS R21 EY023689NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017823NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017825NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017826NEI NIH HHS U10 EY017828NEI NIH HHS U10 EY023530
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare baseline characteristics, visual acuity (VA) and morphological outcomes between eyes with baseline hard exudates (HE) and all other eyes among patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD) treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF).

designProspective cohort study within the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT).

participantsPatients with NVAMD.

methodsReaders evaluated baseline and follow-up morphology on digital color images, fluorescein angiography (FA), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in eyes with NVAMD that were randomly assigned to treatment with either ranibizumab or bevacizumab. Ophthalmologists identified HE on color images in the study eye.

main outcome measuresVA; scar; geographic atrophy; retinal thickness, fluid; and number of anti-VEGF injections.

resultsHE was present in 128 of 1185 (11%) study eyes at baseline, 77% within 1 disc diameter of the foveal center. Patients with study eye HE were more likely female (81% vs 60%; p<0.001) and non-smokers (53% vs 42%; p=0.004). Both groups had similar proportions of hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia. At baseline, eyes with HE had worse VA (mean 57 vs 61 letters; p=0.003), larger total lesion size (3.3 vs 2.4 DA; p <0.001), greater total foveal thickness (522µm vs 452µm; p<0.001), more retinal angiomatous proliferation (18% vs 10%; p=0.009) and sub-RPE fluid (65% vs 47%; p<0.001). At 1 year, VA was similar in both groups; more eyes with baseline HE had no fluid (45% vs 29%; p<0.001) and greater reduction in total foveal thickness (-266µm vs -158u; p<0.001). VA at year 2 was similar but retinas of eyes with baseline HE were thinner (267µm vs 299µm; p=0.03) and fewer eyes had sub-retinal fluid (23% vs 36%; p=0.008). HE was present in 19% of eyes at 1 year and 5% of eyes at 2 years. LIPC promoter SNP rs10468017 was not associated with NVAMD HE.

conclusionEyes with HE have larger CNV lesions and more RAP. Their initially thicker retina rapidly becomes thinner on anti-VEGF treatment. HE is not significantly associated with hyperlipidemia. HE at baseline does not significantly influence VA, scar and GA outcomes in eyes with NVAMD treated with anti-VEGF. Few eyes have HE at year 2.

Identifiers

PMID28620652
PMCPMC5467458
OpenAlexW2556011637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.