Cited by 232Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsRetinal Imaging and AnalysisRetinal and Macular Surgery

Macular Morphology and Visual Acuity in the Second Year of the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials

Open access
Sharma, Sumit, Toth, Cynthia A., Daniel, Ebenezer, Grunwald, Juan E., Maguire, Maureen G., Ying, Gui-Shuang, Huang, Jiayan, Martin, Daniel F. +1 more·2016·Ophthalmology

Abstract

Purpose To describe the association between morphologic features on fundus photography (FP), fluorescein angiography (FA), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) and visual acuity (VA) in the second year of the Comparison of Age-related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (CATT).Design Prospective cohort study within a randomized clinical trial.Participants Participants in the CATT.Methods Study eye eligibility required angiographic and OCT evidence of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and VA between 20/25 and 20/320. Treatment was assigned randomly to ranibizumab or bevacizumab with 3 different dosing regimens over a 2-year period.Main outcome measures Fluid type, location, and thickness; retina and subretinal tissue complex thickness on OCT; size and lesion composition on FP and FA; and VA.Results Among 1185 CATT participants, 993 (84%) had fluid on OCT at baseline and completed 2 years of follow-up. At 2 years, intraretinal fluid (IRF), subretinal fluid (SRF), sub-retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) fluid, and subretinal tissue complex thickness decreased in all treatment groups. Ranibizumab monthly was best able to resolve each type of fluid. Eyes with SRF in the foveal center on OCT had better mean VA than eyes with no SRF (72.8 vs. 66.6 letters; P = 0.006). Eyes with IRF in the foveal center had worse mean VA than eyes without IRF (59.9 vs. 70.9 letters; P < 0.0001). Eyes with retinal thickness <120 μm had worse VA compared with eyes with retinal thickness 120 to 212 and >212 μm (59.4 vs. 71.3 vs. 70.3 letters; P < 0.0001). At 2 years, the mean VA (letters) of eyes varied substantially by the type of subfoveal pathology on FP and FA: 70.6 for no pathology; 74.1 for fluid only; 73.3 for CNV or pigment epithelial (RPE) detachment; 68.4 for nongeographic atrophy; and 62.9 for geographic atrophy, hemorrhage, RPE tear, or scar (P < 0.0001).Conclusions The associations between VA and morphologic features identified through year 1 were maintained or strengthened during year 2. Eyes with foveal IRF, abnormally thin retina, greater thickness of the subretinal tissue complex on OCT, and subfoveal geographic atrophy or scar on FP/FA had the worst VA. Subretinal fluid was associated with better VA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.12.002

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In CATT, macular atrophy and foveal scar were previously reported as the two foremost morphological outcomes tied to poor visual acuity.

    “We have previously reported that both macular atrophy and foveal scar are the two foremost morphological outcomes associated with poor visual acuity in CATT.9”

    From Development and Course of Scars in the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (2018) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) identifies foveal scar and foveal geographic atrophy among the features associated with the largest decreases in visual acuity in CATT. It also names several other features in that group, so it does not establish atrophy and scar as the two foremost outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Scars thicker than 0.2 mm have been linked to extensive loss of photoreceptors overlying the scar.

    “Scars thicker than 0.2 mm have been associated with large scale loss of the photoreceptors overlying the scar tissue.8, 9”

    From Development and Course of Scars in the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials (2018) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Results sections on OCT thickness and fundus features report that thicker subretinal tissue complexes and foveal scars were associated with worse visual acuity. They do not report a 0.2 mm scar-thickness threshold or loss of photoreceptors overlying a scar; searches for those terms found no such passage in our copy. Page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Cross-sectionally, eyes with intraretinal fluid have worse visual acuity during anti-VEGF therapy, whereas those with subretinal fluid have better visual acuity.

    “On a cross-sectional basis, the presence of intraretinal fluid is associated with worse visual acuity during anti-VEGF treatment while the presence of subretinal fluid is associated with better visual acuity.36–38”
  • Geographic atrophy affected 20% of eyes at 2 years and 41% at 5 years; subfoveal geographic atrophy rose from 6% to 17%.

    “We also previously reported that the proportion of eyes with geographic atrophy was 20% at 2 years and this proportion increased to 41% at 5 years, with an increase in subfoveal geographic atrophy from 6% to 17%.7,37”
  • Retinal thinning to <120 microns was associated with worse visual acuity outcomes at 1 and 2 years.

    “We previously reported that retinal thinning to <120 microns was associated with worse VA outcomes at 1 and 2 years.36,37”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sharma, S., Toth, C. A., Daniel, E., Grunwald, J. E., Maguire, M. G., Ying, G.-S., Huang, J., Martin, D. F., & Jaffe, G. J.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Jaffe, Glenn J.
Venue
Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-04
Volume
123
Issue
4
Pages
865-875
ISSN
0161-6420 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2225799082
Cited by
231
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 9
FWCI
20.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute (U10EY017825, U10EY017826, R21EY023689, U10EY017823, U10EY017828)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal and Macular Surgery
Keywords
age-related macular degeneration, choroidal neovascularization, visual acuity, intraretinal fluid, subretinal fluid, ranibizumab, bevacizumab, anti-VEGF therapy, fundus photography, fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography
MeSH terms
Bevacizumab, Ranibizumab, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Fluorescein Angiography, Humans, Macula Lutea, Male, Photography, Prospective Studies, Visual Acuity, Cohort Studies, Choroidal Neovascularization, Angiogenesis Inhibitors, Tomography, Optical Coherence, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A, Retinal Pigment Epithelium, Geographic Atrophy, Wet Macular Degeneration, Intravitreal Injections, Subretinal Fluid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review