Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33737853›Full record

ArticleEye and brain2021

Evaluation of Retinal Layer Thickness Parameters as Biomarkers in a Real-World Multiple Sclerosis Cohort.

Natascha Schurz, Lydia Sariaslani, Patrick Altmann, Fritz Leutmezer, Christoph Mitsch, Berthold Pemp, Paulus Rommer, Tobias Zrzavy, Thomas Berger, Gabriel Bsteh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eye and brain, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Natascha Schurz *Department of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Lydia Sariaslani *Department of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Patrick AltmannDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Fritz LeutmezerDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Christoph MitschDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Berthold PempDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0569-0229
Paulus RommerDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Tobias ZrzavyDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Thomas BergerDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5626-1144
Gabriel BstehDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0825-0851

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRetinal layer thickness parameters measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) are emerging biomarkers of neuroaxonal degeneration and inflammation in multiple sclerosis (MS). We aimed to evaluate the value of retinal layer thickness for prediction of disability worsening and relapse in a real-world MS cohort. PATIENTS AND

methodsFor this longitudinal observational study, we included MS patients with spectral-domain OCT scans available and ≥1 year of clinical follow-up. The value of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL), macular ganglion-cell-and-inner-plexiform-layer (GCIPL) and inner nuclear layer (INL) thickness for prediction of disability worsening and relapse during the observation period was tested by multivariate models.

resultsWe analyzed 60 MS patients during a mean observation period of 2.9 years (SD 1.8). Lower baseline thickness of GCIPL (cut-off <77µm; HR 4.1, p=0.001) and pRNFL (cut-off ≤88µm; HR 3.1, p=0.019) were associated with an increased risk of disability worsening. Longitudinally, mean thinning rates were -0.8µm/year (SD 1.6) for GCIPL, -0.6µm/year (SD 3.5) for pRNFL. GCIPL thinning ≥1.0µm/year and pRNFL >1.5µm/year is associated with higher likelihood of disability worsening (HR 5.7, p=0.009 and HR 6.8, p=0.003, respectively). INL thickened in patients with relapse by a mean 0.9µm while thinning by 0.3µm in patients without relapse (p=0.04). In multivariate analyses, INL thickening was associated with an increased probability of relapse (OR 17.8, p=0.023).

conclusionCross-sectional and longitudinal measurement of GCIPL and pRNFL thinning is reliable as a biomarker of disability worsening in a real-world setting. Change of INL thickness is a promising marker of relapse, i.e. inflammatory activity.

Indexed as

biomarkermultiple sclerosisoptical coherence tomographyprogressionrelapseretinal thinning

Identifiers

PMID33737853
PMCPMC7966301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.