ArticleTherapeutic advances in ophthalmology
Evaluating for pentosan polysulfate maculopathy at a single academic institution.
Article in Therapeutic advances in ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To report the practices and outcomes of ophthalmic evaluations for pentosan polysulfate sodium (PPS) maculopathy at a single institution. Methods: This study was conducted on patients of Massachusetts Eye and Ear who had documented PPS exposure and an ophthalmic encounter from 2019 through 2022. The main outcomes were examination components performed and identification of PPS maculopathy. Image analysis confirmed findings. Results: Thirty-seven patients were included. Of the initial encounters, optical coherence tomography (OCT) was documented for 29 (78.4%) patients, fundus autofluorescence (FAF) for 13 (35.1%), and color fundus photography (CFP) for 12 (32.4%). Four cases (10.8%) of PPS maculopathy were observed. Mean (range) duration of exposure was 17 (15-20), and mean (range) cumulative exposure was 2418 (2190-2628) mg. Maculopathy did not occur until after 15 years of exposure and greater than 2000 mg of cumulative exposure. Three cases (8.1%) of PPS maculopathy were evaluated following drug cessation over a mean of 18.3 months. Two cases (5.4%) of PPS maculopathy progression post-cessation over durations of 1.1 and 4.3 years were described. Conclusion: We found inadequate imaging and documentation of OCT, CFP, and FAF to evaluate for toxicity in patients with a history of current or past PPS exposure. This study contributes four cases of PPS maculopathy to the growing literature reporting the phenotypic spectrum of toxicity, including two cases of maculopathy progression following drug cessation. There is a need for evaluations post-cessation due to possible progression of maculopathy, so patients are not treated inappropriately for differential diagnoses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.