Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41721855›Full record

ReviewGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026

Geographic atrophy in age-related macular degeneration: phenotypic characterisation for clinical trial consideration.

Grace A Borchert, Peter Charbel Issa, Kanmin Xue, Robert E MacLaren, Jasmina Cehajic-Kapetanovic, Susan M Downes, Samantha R De Silva

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Grace A BorchertNuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Peter Charbel IssaSchool of Medicine and Health, Department of Ophthalmology, Technical University of Munich, TUM University Hospital, Munich, Germany.
Kanmin XueNuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Robert E MacLarenNuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jasmina Cehajic-KapetanovicNuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Susan M DownesNuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Samantha R De SilvaNuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. samantha.desilva@ndcn.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4455-2814

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Geographic atrophy (GA) is an advanced form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and a leading cause of central vision loss. Advances in multimodal imaging for GA have improved its phenotypic characterisation, enabling more precise assessment of disease. This is increasingly important for identifying features predictive of progression to inform prognosis and guide patient counselling, enable selection for clinical trials and for disease monitoring both in routine clinical practice and in a research setting. In addition, accurately determining foveal involvement is crucial for selection of patients suitable for emerging therapies. High-resolution imaging is also important to recognise and distinguish GA subtypes such as pachychoroid GA from conventional GA, given their genetic and phenotypic differences and possible variation in response to therapy.Imaging modalities include colour fundus photography, which is widely available and allows an initial assessment of GA lesions. Fundus autofluorescence imaging permits clear visualisation of GA borders and provides an accurate topographical map of GA pattern and extent, whereas near-infrared reflectance imaging may be superior for evaluation of foveal involvement. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) allows for measurement of the ellipsoid zone which may correlate to visual function and permits differentiation between biomarkers such as nascent GA, incomplete and complete retinal pigment epithelium and outer retinal atrophy (iRORA and cRORA respectively), and identification of pachychoroid GA. Each of these have important prognostic implications and enable accurate selection for clinical trials, monitoring progression and treatment response. Emerging approaches such as red excitation light and high-resolution OCT, may provide more accurate and reliable assessment of atrophic changes. Alongside these advances, artificial intelligence-based tools show great potential in automating GA detection, characterising of structural biomarkers, measuring progression rates and screening patients for clinical trials, increasingly reliability and reproducibility. A better understanding of the important role of multimodal imaging in the classification and assessment of GA, and detection of factors that affect progression will enable clinicians to advise, monitor and, where possible, appropriately treat this major cause of sight loss.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicFluorescein AngiographyGeographic AtrophyMacular DegenerationRetinal Pigment EpitheliumTomography, Optical CoherenceDisease ProgressionFundus OculiHumansPhenotypeAIGA AMDGeographic atrophyNon-neovascular age-related macular degenerationPhenotypes

Identifiers

PMID41721855
PMCPMC13091899

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.