Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40557781›Full record

ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2025

High risk does not guarantee high accuracy-Evaluating the prognostic accuracy of OCT biomarkers for predicting late AMD.

Matt Trinh, Rene Cheung, Judy Nam, David Ng, Lisa Nivison-Smith, Angelica Ly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. High risk does not guarantee high accuracy-Evaluating the prognostic accuracy of OCT biomarkers for predicting late AMD.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Matt TrinhSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6184-0666
Rene CheungSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Judy NamSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
David NgVision Eye Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Lisa Nivison-SmithSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6677-1949
Angelica LySchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7881-1522

Funding

NHMRC 1174385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe translation of high-risk biomarkers into accurate predictions of late age-related macular degeneration (AMD) may be limited by biomarker prevalence, subjective identification and competing risks from concurrent biomarkers. This study evaluates the prognostic performance of key optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers for progression to late AMD, with colour fundus photography (CFP) as the reference standard.

methodsThis retrospective study included 78 single eyes with intermediate AMD, propensity-score matched by age and sex between converters and non-converters to late AMD. Ten OCT biomarkers empirically derived from recent meta-analysis, alongside CFP biomarkers of large drusen and pigmentary abnormality, were independently graded by three clinician-researchers. Biomarkers' associated risk (odds ratios) and prognostic performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity) were evaluated for predicting late AMD.

resultsThe adjusted risk was highest for OCT-detected nascent geographic atrophy, shallow irregular retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) elevations, drusenoid pigment epithelium detachment and RPE reflective abnormality (odds ratios, 6.66 [1.32, 42.71] to 28.27 [2.44, 545.3], p < 0.05). However, CFP-detected pigmentary abnormalities demonstrated the highest individual prognostic accuracy (77.69 [68.11, 87.27]% AUC, p < 0.0001), with excellent sensitivity (92.31%) but moderate specificity (63.08%). Adding at least three OCT biomarkers was required to improve prognostic performance significantly (91.01 [84.66, 97.36]%, p < 0.0001), and at least eight additional biomarkers to yield both excellent sensitivity (94.62%) and specificity (90.77%).

conclusionsCFP-detected pigmentary abnormality remains a mainstay of clinical AMD prognostication, likely due to its higher prevalence and interpretability than high-risk OCT biomarkers. Integrating OCT biomarkers into clinical prognostic models is promising but complex and may require automated identification to aid efficiency.

Indexed as

Macular DegenerationRetinal Pigment EpitheliumTomography, Optical CoherenceAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersDisease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesROC CurveBiomarkersaccuracyage‐related macular degenerationarea under the receiver operating characteristic curvebiomarkerOCTprognosissensitivityspecificity

Identifiers

PMID40557781
PMCPMC12357231

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.