Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38278445›Full record

Observational studyOphthalmology2024

Best Vitelliform Macular Dystrophy Natural History Study Report 1: Clinical Features and Genetic Findings.

Yannik Laich, Michalis Georgiou, Kaoru Fujinami, Malena Daich Varela, Yu Fujinami-Yokokawa, Shaima Awadh Hashem, Thales Antonio Cabral de Guimaraes, Omar A Mahroo, Andrew R Webster, Michel Michaelides

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Yannik LaichMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Eye Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Michalis GeorgiouMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Jones Eye Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Kaoru FujinamiMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Laboratory of Visual Physiology, Division of Vision Research, National Institute of Sensory Organs, NHO Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Malena Daich VarelaMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Yu Fujinami-YokokawaUCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Laboratory of Visual Physiology, Division of Vision Research, National Institute of Sensory Organs, NHO Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Health Policy and Management, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shaima Awadh HashemMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Thales Antonio Cabral de GuimaraesMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Omar A MahrooMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew R WebsterMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Michel MichaelidesMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: michel.michaelides@ucl.ac.uk.
Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBKeio University · JP

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206619/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyze the genetic findings, clinical spectrum, and natural history of Best vitelliform macular dystrophy (BVMD) in a cohort of 222 children and adults.

designSingle-center retrospective, consecutive, observational study.

participantsPatients with a clinical diagnosis of BVMD from pedigrees with a likely disease-causing monoallelic sequence variant in the BEST1 gene.

methodsData were extracted from electronic and physical case notes. Electrophysiologic assessment and molecular genetic testing were analyzed.

main outcome measuresMolecular genetic test findings and clinical findings including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), choroidal neovascularization (CNV) rates, and electrophysiologic parameters.

resultsTwo hundred twenty-two patients from 141 families were identified harboring 69 BEST1 variants. Mean age at presentation was 26.8 years (range, 1.3-84.8 years) and most patients (61.5%) demonstrated deterioration of central vision. Major funduscopic findings included 128 eyes (30.6%) with yellow vitelliform lesions, 78 eyes (18.7%) with atrophic changes, 49 eyes (11.7%) with fibrotic changes, 48 eyes (11.5%) with mild pigmentary changes, and 43 eyes (10.3%) showing a vitelliruptive appearance. Mean BCVA was 0.37 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/47) for the right eye and 0.33 logMAR (Snellen equivalent, 20/43) for the left eye at presentation, with a mean annual loss rate of 0.013 logMAR and 0.009 logMAR, respectively, over a mean follow-up of 9.7 years. Thirty-seven patients (17.3%) received a diagnosis of CNV over a mean follow-up of 8.0 years. Eyes with CNV that received treatment with an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent showed better mean BCVA compared with eyes that were not treated with an anti-VEGF agent (0.28 logMAR [Snellen equivalent, 20/38] vs. 0.62 logMAR [Snellen equivalent, 20/83]). Most eyes exhibited a hyperopic refractive error (78.7%), and 13 patients (6.1%) received a diagnosis of amblyopia. Among the 3 most common variants, p.(Ala243Val) was associated with a later age of onset, better age-adjusted BCVA, and less advanced Gass stages compared with p.(Arg218Cys) and p.(Arg218His).

conclusionsBVMD shows a wide spectrum of phenotypic variability. The disease is very slowly progressive, and the observed phenotype-genotype correlations allow for more accurate prognostication and counselling. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

BestrophinsElectroretinographyVisual AcuityVitelliform Macular DystrophyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolChoroidal NeovascularizationElectrooculographyFemaleFluorescein AngiographyHumansInfantBEST1 protein, humanBestrophinsBest vitelliform macular dystrophyGeneticsNatural historyRetinal dystrophy

Identifiers

PMID38278445
PMCPMC11932931
OpenAlexW4391188712

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.