Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30215852›Full record

ArticleClinical genetics2018

Genetic screening for macular dystrophies in patients clinically diagnosed with dry age-related macular degeneration.

Eveline Kersten, Maartje J Geerlings, Marc Pauper, Jordi Corominas, Bjorn Bakker, Lebriz Altay, Sascha Fauser, Eiko K de Jong, Carel B Hoyng, Anneke I den Hollander

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Rescue of cone and rod photoreceptor function in a CDHR1-model of age-related retinal degeneration.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. A Case Report ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Eveline KerstenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Maartje J GeerlingsDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1164-3573
Marc PauperDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jordi CorominasDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Bjorn BakkerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Lebriz AltayDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sascha FauserDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Eiko K de JongDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Carel B HoyngDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Anneke I den HollanderDepartment of Ophthalmology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0634-5408
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLRoche (Switzerland) · CHUniversity Hospital Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It can be clinically challenging to distinguish dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD) from AMD-mimicking dystrophies, and sometimes misdiagnosis occurs. With upcoming therapies for dry AMD it is important to exclude patients with a different retinal disease from clinical trials. In this study we evaluated the occurrence of AMD-mimicking dystrophies in an AMD cohort. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed in 218 patients with intermediate AMD or geographic atrophy secondary to AMD and 133 control individuals. WES data was analyzed for rare variants in 19 genes associated with autosomal dominant and recessive macular dystrophies mimicking AMD. In three (1.4%) of 218 cases we identified a pathogenic heterozygous variant (PRPH2 c.424C > T; p.R142W) causal for autosomal dominant central areolar choroidal dystrophy (CACD). Phenotypically, these patients all presented with geographic atrophy. In 12 (5.5%) of 218 cases we identified a heterozygous variant of unknown clinical significance, but predicted to be highly deleterious, in genes previously associated with autosomal dominant macular dystrophies. The distinction between AMD and AMD-mimicking dystrophies, such as CACD, can be challenging based on fundus examination alone. Genetic screening for genes associated with macular dystrophies, especially PRPH2, can be beneficial to help identify AMD-mimicking dystrophies.

Indexed as

Genetic Association StudiesGenetic Predisposition to DiseasePhenotypeAgedAged, 80 and overAllelesAmino Acid SubstitutionCase-Control StudiesExome SequencingFemaleGenes, DominantGenetic TestingGenotypeGeographic AtrophyHumansMacular Degenerationage-related macular degenerationAMDCACDcentral areolar choroidal dystrophygenetic screeningmacular dystrophiesPRPH2WESwhole-exome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID30215852
PMCPMC6282796
OpenAlexW2890877268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.