ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Case Report: Disulfiram-induced optic neuropathy.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Toxic optic neuropathy (TON) is characterized by bilateral, symmetric vision loss with damage to the papillomacular bundle, central or cecocentral scotomas, and impaired color vision. While TON has been well-documented with medications such as ethambutol and linezolid, disulfiram-induced optic neuropathy remains rare with limited case reports in the literature. Case presentation: We report two cases of disulfiram-induced TON in patients with alcohol use disorder. Case 1 involved a 52-year-old man who developed painless, progressive bilateral vision loss after 9 months of disulfiram therapy (250 mg daily). Initial visual acuity was 20/100 OD and 20/70 OS with severe dyschromatopsia (control plate only bilaterally on Ishihara testing) and central scotomas. Case 2 involved a 55-year-old man with 5 years of disulfiram use (250 mg daily) who presented with bilateral central vision loss, visual acuity of 20/50 OD and 20/40 OS, and marked color vision impairment. Both patients underwent extensive workup including neuroimaging, autoimmune panels, infectious serologies, nutritional markers, heavy metal screening, and genetic testing for hereditary optic neuropathies, all of which were unremarkable. Results: Following disulfiram discontinuation, both patients demonstrated significant visual recovery. In Case 1, visual acuity improved to 20/40 OD and 20/30 OS at 7 months with normalization of visual fields. In Case 2, visual acuity recovered to 20/20 bilaterally at 3 months with complete restoration of color vision (14/14 Ishihara plates). Both cases showed persistent temporal retinal nerve fiber layer thinning on optical coherence tomography despite functional recovery. Conclusion: These cases highlight disulfiram as an important cause of TON in patients with alcohol use disorder. The differential diagnosis in this population must include nutritional and hereditary optic neuropathies, as mitochondrial dysfunction likely represents a common final pathway. Early recognition and drug cessation can result in substantial visual recovery, although structural changes may persist. Clinicians should maintain awareness of this rare but reversible complication when prescribing disulfiram for alcohol dependence.
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.