Characterization of Visual Function, Interocular Variability and Progression Using Static Perimetry-Derived Metrics in RPGR-Associated Retinopathy

James J L Tee, Yesa Yang, Angelos Kalitzeos, Andrew Webster, James Bainbridge, Richard G Weleber, Michel Michaelides, James J L Tee, Yesa Yang, Angelos Kalitzeos, Andrew Webster, James Bainbridge, Richard G Weleber, Michel Michaelides

Abstract

Purpose: To characterize bilateral visual function, interocular variability and progression by using static perimetry-derived volumetric and pointwise metrics in subjects with retinitis pigmentosa associated with mutations in the retinitis pigmentosa GTPase regulator (RPGR) gene.

Methods: This was a prospective longitudinal observational study of 47 genetically confirmed subjects. Visual function was assessed with ETDRS and Pelli-Robson charts; and Octopus 900 static perimetry using a customized, radially oriented 185-point grid. Three-dimensional hill-of-vision topographic models were produced and interrogated with the Visual Field Modeling and Analysis software to obtain three volumetric metrics: VTotal, V30, and V5. These were analyzed together with Octopus mean sensitivity values. Interocular differences were assessed with the Bland-Altman method. Metric-specific exponential decline rates were calculated.

Results: Baseline symmetry was demonstrated by relative interocular difference values of 1% for VTotal and 8% with V30. Degree of symmetry varied between subjects and was quantified with the subject percentage interocular difference (SPID). SPID was 16% for VTotal and 17% for V30. Interocular symmetry in progression was greatest when quantified by VTotal and V30, with 73% and 64% of subjects possessing interocular rate differences smaller in magnitude than respective annual progression rates. Functional decline was evident with increasing age. An overall annual exponential decline of 6% was evident with both VTotal and V30.

Conclusions: In general, good interocular symmetry exists; however, there was both variation between subjects and with the use of various metrics. Our findings will guide patient selection and design of RPGR treatment trials, and provide clinicians with specific prognostic information to offer patients affected by this condition.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart illustrating recruitment of subjects and study data based on the inclusion criteria.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Linear trend lines illustrating V30 progression rates. Trend lines and data points of right eyes are represented by solid slope lines and solid circles, left eyes by dotted slope lines and dotted circles. Trend lines with R2 ≥ 0.4 are shown. Perimetry tests that met reliability criteria were used. A minimum of three tests with follow-up duration ≥1 year were required of each eye.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bland-Altman plot illustrating VTotal interocular differences at baseline. Interocular difference is plotted against the average interocular value for each subject as represented by a circular data point. Dashed line shows mean of interocular differences; dotted lines represent upper and lower 95% limits of agreement.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Bland-Altman plot illustrating interocular differences in V30 rate. Interocular difference is plotted against the average interocular rate for each subject as represented by one circular data point. Long dashed line represent median interocular rate difference; gray small dashed lines represent third and first quartile interocular rate difference; black long dash–dot lines represent upper and lower reference values for 1× annual progression rate; gray double lines represent upper and lower reference values for 2× annual progression rate; black small dotted lines represent upper and lower reference values for 3× annual progression rate.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Scatterplot of V30 against subjects' age. A common decline for all subjects is represented by the solid exponential line with the equation y = 26.9651 e−0.0613x. R2 = 0.49. The equation is provided only as a guide, as overall progression rates for the study were obtained via the mixed-models method.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Baseline visual function of subjects as grouped by respective age categories. Visual function characterized by metrics of peripheral function is shown in (A), function characterized by metrics of isolated central function is shown in (B). A decline in peripheral function is evident from the early ages, whereas a decline in central function becomes apparent only in the later-age categories. Age categories: (1)

Figure 7

Scatterplots of V Total (A)…

Figure 7

Scatterplots of V Total (A) and V 30 (B) volumetric metrics at baseline…

Figure 7
Scatterplots of VTotal (A) and V30 (B) volumetric metrics at baseline for all study subjects, right eyes corresponding to left eyes. Spearman correlation coefficients—rs = 0.94, P < 0.0001 for VTotal and rs = 0.95, P < 0.0001 for V30—indicate a very strong and significant interocular correlation for both metrics. Diagonal lines represent the line of equality.
All figures (7)
Figure 7
Figure 7
Scatterplots of VTotal (A) and V30 (B) volumetric metrics at baseline for all study subjects, right eyes corresponding to left eyes. Spearman correlation coefficients—rs = 0.94, P < 0.0001 for VTotal and rs = 0.95, P < 0.0001 for V30—indicate a very strong and significant interocular correlation for both metrics. Diagonal lines represent the line of equality.

References

    1. Hartong DT, Berson EL, Dryja TP. . Retinitis pigmentosa. . 2006; 368: 1795– 1809.
    1. Hamel C. . Retinitis pigmentosa. . 2006; 1: 40.
    1. Haim M. . Epidemiology of retinitis pigmentosa in Denmark. . 2002; 233: 1– 34.
    1. You QS, Xu L, Wang YX,et al. . Prevalence of retinitis pigmentosa in North China: the Beijing Eye Public Health Care Project. . 2013; 91: e499– e500.
    1. Liew G, Michaelides M, Bunce C. . A comparison of the causes of blindness certifications in England and Wales in working age adults (16-64 years), 1999-2000 with 2009-2010. . 2014; 4: e004015.
    1. Xu Y, Guan L, Shen T,et al. . Mutations of 60 known causative genes in 157 families with retinitis pigmentosa based on exome sequencing. . 2014; 133: 1255– 1271.
    1. Tee JJ, Smith AJ, Hardcastle AJ, Michaelides M. . RPGR-associated retinopathy: clinical features, molecular genetics, animal models and therapeutic options. . 2016; 100: 1022– 1027.
    1. Beltran WA, Cideciyan AV, Lewin AS,et al. . Gene therapy rescues photoreceptor blindness in dogs and paves the way for treating human X-linked retinitis pigmentosa. . 2012; 109: 2132– 2137.
    1. Pawlyk BS, Bulgakov OV, Sun X,et al. . Photoreceptor rescue by an abbreviated human RPGR gene in a murine model of X-linked retinitis pigmentosa. . 2016; 23: 196– 204.
    1. Massof RW, Finkelstein D, Starr SJ, Kenyon KR, Fleischman JA, Maumenee IH. . Bilateral symmetry of vision disorders in typical retinitis pigmentosa. . 1979; 63: 90– 96.
    1. Ross DF, Fishman GA, Gilbert LD, Anderson RJ. . Variability of visual field measurements in normal subjects and patients with retinitis pigmentosa. . 1984; 102: 1004– 1010.
    1. Berson EL, Sandberg MA, Rosner B, Birch DG, Hanson AH. . Natural course of retinitis pigmentosa over a three-year interval. . 1985; 99: 240– 251.
    1. Massof RW, Dagnelie G, Benzschawel T. . First order dynamics of visual field loss in retinitis pigmentosa. . 1990; 5: 1– 26.
    1. Holopigian K, Greenstein V, Seiple W, Carr RE. . Rates of change differ among measures of visual function in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. . 1996; 103: 398– 405.
    1. Grover S, Fishman GA, Anderson RJ, Alexander KR, Derlacki DJ. . Rate of visual field loss in retinitis pigmentosa. . 1997; 104: 460– 465.
    1. Iannaccone A, Kritchevsky SB, Ciccarelli ML,et al. . Kinetics of visual field loss in Usher syndrome Type II. . 2004; 45: 784– 792.
    1. Sandberg MA, Rosner B, Weigel-DiFranco C, Dryja TP, Berson EL. . Disease course of patients with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa due to RPGR gene mutations. . 2007; 48: 1298– 1304.
    1. Huang WC, Wright AF, Roman AJ,et al. . RPGR-associated retinal degeneration in human X-linked RP and a murine model. . 2012; 53: 5594– 5608.
    1. Zahid S, Khan N, Branham K,et al. . Phenotypic conservation in patients with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa caused by RPGR mutations. . 2013; 131: 1016– 1025.
    1. Bellingrath JS, Ochakovski GA, Seitz IP,et al. . High symmetry of visual acuity and visual fields in RPGR-linked retinitis pigmentosa. . 2017; 58: 4457– 4466.
    1. Birch DG, Anderson JL, Fish GE. . Yearly rates of rod and cone functional loss in retinitis pigmentosa and cone-rod dystrophy. . 1999; 106: 258– 268.
    1. Hoffman DR, Locke KG, Wheaton DH, Fish GE, Spencer R, Birch DG. . A randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of docosahexaenoic acid supplementation for X-linked retinitis pigmentosa. . 2004; 137: 704– 718.
    1. Kim LS, McAnany JJ, Alexander KR, Fishman GA. . Intersession repeatability of humphrey perimetry measurements in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. . 2007; 48: 4720– 4724.
    1. Berson EL, Rosner B, Sandberg MA,et al. . Clinical trial of lutein in patients with retinitis pigmentosa receiving vitamin A. . 2010; 128: 403– 411.
    1. Birch DG, Weleber RG, Duncan JL, Jaffe GJ, Tao W;. Ciliary Neurotrophic Factor Retinitis Pigmentosa Study Group. Randomized trial of ciliary neurotrophic factor delivered by encapsulated cell intraocular implants for retinitis pigmentosa. . 2013; 156: 283– 292.e1.
    1. Birch DG, Locke KG, Felius J,et al. . Rates of decline in regions of the visual field defined by frequency-domain optical coherence tomography in patients with RPGR-mediated X-linked retinitis pigmentosa. . 2015; 122: 833– 839.
    1. Weleber RG, Smith TB, Peters D,et al. . VFMA: topographic analysis of sensitivity data from full-field static perimetry. . 2015; 4 2: 14.
    1. Smith TB, Parker M, Steinkamp PN,et al. . Structure-function modeling of optical coherence tomography and standard automated perimetry in the retina of patients with autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. . 2016; 11: e0148022.
    1. Lindberg CR, Fishman GA, Anderson RJ, Vasquez V. . Contrast sensitivity in retinitis pigmentosa. . 1981; 65: 855– 858.
    1. Hyvarinen L, Rovamo J, Laurinen P, Peltomaa A. . Contrast sensitivity function in evaluation of visual impairment due to retinitis pigmentosa. . 1981; 59: 763– 773.
    1. Akeo K, Hiida Y, Saga M, Inoue R, Oguchi Y. . Correlation between contrast sensitivity and visual acuity in retinitis pigmentosa patients. . 2002; 216: 185– 191.
    1. Alexander KR, Derlacki DJ, Fishman GA. . Visual acuity vs letter contrast sensitivity in retinitis pigmentosa. . 1995; 35: 1495– 1499.
    1. Haymes S, Guest D, Heyes A, Johnston A. . Mobility of people with retinitis pigmentosa as a function of vision and psychological variables. . 1996; 73: 621– 637.
    1. Geruschat DR, Turano KA, Stahl JW. . Traditional measures of mobility performance and retinitis pigmentosa. . 1998; 75: 525– 537.
    1. Rubin GS, Roche KB, Prasada-Rao P, Fried LP. . Visual impairment and disability in older adults. . 1994; 71: 750– 760.
    1. Brown DM, Michels M, Kaiser PK, Heier JS, Sy JP, Ianchulev T. . Ranibizumab versus verteporfin photodynamic therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: two-year results of the ANCHOR study. . 2009; 116: 57– 65.e55.
    1. Heier JS, Brown DM, Chong V,et al. . Intravitreal aflibercept (VEGF trap-eye) in wet age-related macular degeneration. . 2012; 119: 2537– 2548.
    1. Boyer DS, Yoon YH, Belfort R Jr, et al. . Three-year, randomized, sham-controlled trial of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with diabetic macular edema. . 2014; 121: 1904– 1914.
    1. Mones J, Rubin GS. . Contrast sensitivity as an outcome measure in patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation due to age-related macular degeneration. . 2005; 19: 1142– 1150.
    1. Schiefer U, Pascual JP, Edmunds B,et al. . Comparison of the new perimetric GATE strategy with conventional full-threshold and SITA standard strategies. . 2009; 50: 488– 494.
    1. Luithardt AF, Meisner C, Monhart M, Krapp E, Mast A, Schiefer U. . Validation of a new static perimetric thresholding strategy (GATE). . 2015; 99: 11– 15.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. . Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. . 1999; 8: 135– 160.
    1. Clarke G, Collins RA, Leavitt BR,et al. . A one-hit model of cell death in inherited neuronal degenerations. . 2000; 406: 195– 199.
    1. Berson EL. . Long-term visual prognoses in patients with retinitis pigmentosa: the Ludwig von Sallmann lecture. . 2007; 85: 7– 14.
    1. Caprioli J, Mock D, Bitrian E,et al. . A method to measure and predict rates of regional visual field decay in glaucoma. . 2011; 52: 4765– 4773.
    1. Chen A, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Otarola FJ, Yu F, Afifi AA, Caprioli J. . Models of glaucomatous visual field loss. . 2014; 55: 7881– 7887.
    1. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Caprioli J. . Measuring rates of structural and functional change in glaucoma. . 2015; 99: 893– 898.
    1. Chen FK, Yeoh J, Rahman W, Patel PJ, Tufail A, Da Cruz L. . Topographic variation and interocular symmetry of macular choroidal thickness using enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography. . 2012; 53: 975– 985.
    1. Preliminary report on effects of photocoagulation therapy: The Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. . 1976; 81: 383– 396.
    1. Photocoagulation treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy: the second report of diabetic retinopathy study findings. . 1978; 85: 82– 106.
    1. Early photocoagulation for diabetic retinopathy: ETDRS report number 9: Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. . 1991; 98 5 suppl: 766– 785.
    1. Csaky K, Ferris F III, Chew EY, Nair P, Cheetham JK, Duncan JL. . Report from the NEI/FDA Endpoints Workshop on Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Inherited Retinal Diseases. . 2017; 58: 3456– 3463.
    1. Berson EL, Rosner B, Weigel-DiFranco C, Dryja TP, Sandberg MA. . Disease progression in patients with dominant retinitis pigmentosa and rhodopsin mutations. . 2002; 43: 3027– 3036.
    1. Swanson WH, Felius J, Birch DG. . Effect of stimulus size on static visual fields in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. . 2000; 107: 1950– 1954.
    1. Racette L, Fischer M, Bebie H, Holló G, Johnson CA, Matsumoto C. . Reliability indices. : . Köniz, Switzerland: Haag-Streit AG; 2016: 123– 125.
    1. Lee M, Zulauf M, Caprioli J. . The influence of patient reliability on visual field outcome. . 1994; 117: 756– 761.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera