Retinal autoantibody profile in early age-related macular degeneration: preliminary findings from the Blue Mountains Eye Study
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the retinal autoantibody profile in individuals with and without early age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and to determine whether baseline autoantibodies are associated with progression to advanced AMD 5 and 10 years later. METHODS: Western immunoblotting was used to detect the presence of retinal autoantibodies in the baseline serum of 47 individuals with early AMD and 16 healthy controls from the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Autoantibody isotype, IgG subclass distribution and target antigens in the early AMD group were compared with the control group. The association between baseline autoantibodies and progression to advanced AMD 5 and 10 years later was evaluated using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Retinal autoantibodies were found in a higher proportion of the early AMD group compared with controls (57%vs. 25%, chi2=5.028, P=0.025). Autoantibodies targeted a range of retinal polypeptides in both AMD cases and controls. The commonest polypeptide antigens occurred between 20-35 kDa and 50-60 kDa. More than one IgG subclass was often present in participants with autoantibodies. Over a 10-year period, 11 participants (23.4%) with early AMD progressed to advanced AMD. No association was found between baseline autoantibodies and the development of advanced AMD over 10 years (chi2=0.16, Fisher's exact P=0.59). CONCLUSIONS: The retinal autoantibody profile in early AMD is complex, both in terms of antigenic targets and immunoglobulin isotypes. Detection of potential disease-associated autoantibodies will require a larger sample size and full characterization of the retinal antigens involved.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
This profile does not significantly change with progression from early AMD to advanced stage AMD.
“and this profile does not significantly change with progression from early AMD to advanced stage AMD (Cherepanoff et al., 2006).”
From Retinal ultrastructure of murine models of dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (2010) · cites this paper as Cherepanoff et al., 2006
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 47
- Authors
- Cherepanoff, S., Mitchell, P., Wang, J. J., & Gillies, M. C.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Venue
- Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-08
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 590-595
- ISSN
- 1442-6404 (ISSN-L)
- 1442-9071
- OpenAlex
- W1927715613
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
- Keywords
- age-related macular degeneration, retinal autoantibodies, early AMD, retinal antigens, IgG subclasses, autoantibody isotypes, serum autoantibodies, Blue Mountains Eye Study
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Epitopes, Autoantibodies, Autoantigens, Female, Humans, Immunoglobulin Isotypes, Macular Degeneration, Male, Middle Aged, New South Wales, Retina, Blotting, Western, Disease Progression
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