TY - JOUR
T1 - Characterization of Central Visual Field Loss in End-stage Glaucoma by Unsupervised Artificial Intelligence
AU - Wang, Mengyu
AU - Tichelaar, Jorryt
AU - Pasquale, Louis R.
AU - Shen, Lucy Q.
AU - Boland, Michael V.
AU - Wellik, Sarah R.
AU - De Moraes, Carlos Gustavo
AU - Myers, Jonathan S.
AU - Ramulu, Pradeep
AU - Kwon, Miyoung
AU - Saeedi, Osamah J.
AU - Wang, Hui
AU - Baniasadi, Neda
AU - Li, Dian
AU - Bex, Peter J.
AU - Elze, Tobias
N1 - Funding Information:
reported receiving grants from the National Eye Institute (NEI) during the conduct of the study and having US Application 036770-571001WO, US Application 036770-572001WO, US Provisional Application 62804903, and US Provisional Application 62909386 patents pending. Mr Tichelaar reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), BrightFocus Foundation, Lions Foundation, Grimshaw-Gudewicz Foundation, and Research to Prevent Blindness during the conduct of the study and Provisional US patent 62/804,903 (2019) pending. Dr Pasquale reported receiving personal fees from Bausch & Lomb, Eyenovia, Inc, Verily Life Sciences, and NicOx outside the submitted work. Dr Shen reported receiving grants from the Topcon Research Foundation outside the submitted work and Provisional US patent 62/637,181 and US Provisional Application patent 62909386 pending. Dr Boland reported receiving personal fees from Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc, and Heidelberg Engineering during the conduct of the study. Dr De Moraes reported receiving personal fees from Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc, nonfinancial support from Heidelberg Engineering and Topcon Research Foundation, and personal fees from Reichert Technologies, Novartis International, Belite Bio, and Galimedix Therapeutics, Inc, outside the submitted work. Dr Myers reported receiving nonfinancial support from Heidelberg Engineering and Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc, and grants and nonfinancial support from Diopsys and Haag-Streit Diagnostics outside the submitted work. Dr Saeedi reported receiving grants from the NIH/NEI during the conduct of the study. Dr Bex reported a patent to PCT/US2014/ 052414 Spatial Modeling of Visual Fields pending. Dr Elze reported receiving grants from the NIH, Lions Foundation, Grimshaw-Gudewicz Foundation, Research to Prevent Blindness, and BrightFocus Foundation during the conduct of the study and patent PCT/US2014/052414 issued, patent 036770-571001WO pending, patent 036770-572001WO pending, patent 62/641,785 pending, patent 62/804,903 pending, and US Provisional Application patent 62909386. No other disclosures were reported.
Funding Information:
This study was supported by grants R21 EY030142 (Dr Elze), R21 EY030631 (Dr Elze), R01 EY030575 (Dr Elze), R01 EY015473 (Dr Pasquale), R01 EY027857 (Dr Kwon), and R01 EY025253 (Dr De Moraes) and core grant P30 EY003790 (Drs M. Wang and Elze, Ms Li, and Drs H. Wang and Baniasadi) from the NEI/NIH, BrightFocus Foundation (Drs M. Wang and Elze), Lions Foundation (Drs M. Wang, Baniasadi, and Elze), Grimshaw-Gudewicz Foundation (Drs M. Wang, Baniasadi, and Elze), Research to Prevent Blindness (Drs M. Wang, Baniasadi, and Elze), grants K99 EY028631 (Dr M. Wang) and K23 EY025014 (Dr Saeedi) from the NIH, Harvard Glaucoma Center of Excellence (Drs M. Wang, Elze, and Shen), the Eleanor and Miles Shore Fellowship
Funding Information:
Funding/Support: This study was supported by grants R21 EY030142 (Dr Elze), R21 EY030631 (Dr Elze), R01 EY030575 (Dr Elze), R01 EY015473 (Dr Pasquale), R01 EY027857 (Dr Kwon), and R01 EY025253 (Dr De Moraes) and core grant P30 EY003790 (Drs M. Wang and Elze, Ms Li, and Drs H. Wang and Baniasadi) from the NEI/NIH, BrightFocus Foundation (Drs M. Wang and Elze), Lions Foundation (Drs M. Wang, Baniasadi, and Elze), Grimshaw-Gudewicz Foundation (Drs M. Wang, Baniasadi, and Elze), Research to Prevent Blindness (Drs M. Wang, Baniasadi, and Elze), grants K99 EY028631 (Dr M. Wang) and K23 EY025014 (Dr Saeedi) from the NIH, Harvard Glaucoma Center of Excellence (Drs M. Wang, Elze, and Shen), the Eleanor and Miles Shore Fellowship (Dr Shen), a departmental grant from Research to Prevent Blindness (Dr De Moraes), and the Alice Adler Fellowship (Dr Elze).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/2
Y1 - 2020/2
N2 - Importance: Although the central visual field (VF) in end-stage glaucoma may substantially vary among patients, structure-function studies and quality-of-life assessments are impeded by the lack of appropriate characterization of end-stage VF loss. Objective: To provide a quantitative characterization and classification of central VF loss in end-stage glaucoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study collected data from 5 US glaucoma services from June 1, 1999, through October 1, 2014. A total of 2912 reliable 10-2 VFs of 1103 eyes from 1010 patients measured after end-stage 24-2 VFs with a mean deviation (MD) of-22 dB or less were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from March 28, 2018, through May 23, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Central VF patterns were determined by an artificial intelligence algorithm termed archetypal analysis. Longitudinal analyses were performed to investigate whether the development of central VF defect mostly affects specific vulnerability zones. Results: Among the 1103 patients with the most recent VFs, mean (SD) age was 70.4 (14.3) years; mean (SD) 10-2 MD,-21.5 (5.6) dB. Fourteen central VF patterns were determined, including the most common temporal sparing patterns (304 [27.5%]), followed by mostly nasal loss (280 [25.4%]), hemifield loss (169 [15.3%]), central island (120 [10.9%]), total loss (91 [8.3%]), nearly intact field (56 [5.1%]), inferonasal quadrant sparing (42 [3.8%]), and nearly total loss (41 [3.7%]). Location-specific median total deviation analyses partitioned the central VF into a more vulnerable superonasal zone and a less vulnerable inferotemporal zone. At 1-year and 2-year follow-up, new defects mostly occurred in the more vulnerable zone. Initial encroachments on an intact central VF at follow-up were more likely to be from nasal loss (11 [18.4%]; P <.001). One of the nasal loss patterns had a substantial chance at 2-year follow-up (8 [11.0%]; P =.004) to shift to total loss, whereas others did not. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, central VF loss in end-stage glaucoma was found to exhibit characteristic patterns that might be associated with different subtypes. Initial central VF loss is likely to be nasal loss, and 1 specific type of nasal loss is likely to develop into total loss.
AB - Importance: Although the central visual field (VF) in end-stage glaucoma may substantially vary among patients, structure-function studies and quality-of-life assessments are impeded by the lack of appropriate characterization of end-stage VF loss. Objective: To provide a quantitative characterization and classification of central VF loss in end-stage glaucoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study collected data from 5 US glaucoma services from June 1, 1999, through October 1, 2014. A total of 2912 reliable 10-2 VFs of 1103 eyes from 1010 patients measured after end-stage 24-2 VFs with a mean deviation (MD) of-22 dB or less were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from March 28, 2018, through May 23, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Central VF patterns were determined by an artificial intelligence algorithm termed archetypal analysis. Longitudinal analyses were performed to investigate whether the development of central VF defect mostly affects specific vulnerability zones. Results: Among the 1103 patients with the most recent VFs, mean (SD) age was 70.4 (14.3) years; mean (SD) 10-2 MD,-21.5 (5.6) dB. Fourteen central VF patterns were determined, including the most common temporal sparing patterns (304 [27.5%]), followed by mostly nasal loss (280 [25.4%]), hemifield loss (169 [15.3%]), central island (120 [10.9%]), total loss (91 [8.3%]), nearly intact field (56 [5.1%]), inferonasal quadrant sparing (42 [3.8%]), and nearly total loss (41 [3.7%]). Location-specific median total deviation analyses partitioned the central VF into a more vulnerable superonasal zone and a less vulnerable inferotemporal zone. At 1-year and 2-year follow-up, new defects mostly occurred in the more vulnerable zone. Initial encroachments on an intact central VF at follow-up were more likely to be from nasal loss (11 [18.4%]; P <.001). One of the nasal loss patterns had a substantial chance at 2-year follow-up (8 [11.0%]; P =.004) to shift to total loss, whereas others did not. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, central VF loss in end-stage glaucoma was found to exhibit characteristic patterns that might be associated with different subtypes. Initial central VF loss is likely to be nasal loss, and 1 specific type of nasal loss is likely to develop into total loss.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077751374&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85077751374&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2019.5413
DO - 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2019.5413
M3 - Article
C2 - 31895454
AN - SCOPUS:85077751374
SN - 2168-6165
VL - 138
SP - 190
EP - 198
JO - JAMA Ophthalmology
JF - JAMA Ophthalmology
IS - 2
ER -