KCNV2-Associated Retinopathy: Detailed Retinal Phenotype and Structural Endpoints—KCNV2 Study Group Report 2
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
•KCNV2-associated retinopathy is a slowly progressive disease with early retinal changes, which are predominantly symmetric between eyes.•Disease course can be unpredictable and may severely affect children and young adults.•Findings suggest a potential window for intervention until 40 years of age, albeit with variability between patients due to macular atrophy. PurposeTo describe the detailed retinal phenotype of KCNV2-associated retinopathy.Study designMulticenter international retrospective case series.MethodsReview of retinal imaging including fundus autofluorescence (FAF) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), including qualitative and quantitative analyses.ResultsThree distinct macular FAF features were identified: (1) centrally increased signal (n = 35, 41.7%), (2) decreased autofluorescence (n = 27, 31.1%), and (3) ring of increased signal (n = 37, 44.0%). Five distinct FAF groups were identified based on combinations of those features, with 23.5% of patients changing the FAF group over a mean (range) follow-up of 5.9 years (1.9-13.1 years). Qualitative assessment was performed by grading OCT into 5 grades: (1) continuous ellipsoid zone (EZ) (20.5%); (2) EZ disruption (26.1%); (3) EZ absence, without optical gap and with preserved retinal pigment epithelium complex (21.6%); (4) loss of EZ and a hyporeflective zone at the foveola (6.8%); and (5) outer retina and retinal pigment epithelium complex loss (25.0%). Eighty-six patients had scans available from both eyes, with 83 (96.5%) having the same grade in both eyes, and 36.1% changed OCT grade over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years. The annual rate of outer nuclear layer thickness change was similar for right and left eyes.ConclusionsKCNV2-associated retinopathy is a slowly progressive disease with early retinal changes, which are predominantly symmetric between eyes. The identification of a single OCT or FAF measurement as an endpoint to determine progression that applies to all patients may be challenging, although outer nuclear layer thickness is a potential biomarker. Findings suggest a potential window for intervention until 40 years of age. To describe the detailed retinal phenotype of KCNV2-associated retinopathy. Multicenter international retrospective case series. Review of retinal imaging including fundus autofluorescence (FAF) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), including qualitative and quantitative analyses. Three distinct macular FAF features were identified: (1) centrally increased signal (n = 35, 41.7%), (2) decreased autofluorescence (n = 27, 31.1%), and (3) ring of increased signal (n = 37, 44.0%). Five distinct FAF groups were identified based on combinations of those features, with 23.5% of patients changing the FAF group over a mean (range) follow-up of 5.9 years (1.9-13.1 years). Qualitative assessment was performed by grading OCT into 5 grades: (1) continuous ellipsoid zone (EZ) (20.5%); (2) EZ disruption (26.1%); (3) EZ absence, without optical gap and with preserved retinal pigment epithelium complex (21.6%); (4) loss of EZ and a hyporeflective zone at the foveola (6.8%); and (5) outer retina and retinal pigment epithelium complex loss (25.0%). Eighty-six patients had scans available from both eyes, with 83 (96.5%) having the same grade in both eyes, and 36.1% changed OCT grade over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years. The annual rate of outer nuclear layer thickness change was similar for right and left eyes. KCNV2-associated retinopathy is a slowly progressive disease with early retinal changes, which are predominantly symmetric between eyes. The identification of a single OCT or FAF measurement as an endpoint to determine progression that applies to all patients may be challenging, although outer nuclear layer thickness is a potential biomarker. Findings suggest a potential window for intervention until 40 years of age.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».