MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410221827 · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2025.05.004

Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Direct Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty in Open-Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension

2025· article· en· W4410221827 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gus Gazzard, Nathan Congdon, Augusto Azuara‐Blanco, Eytan Z. Blumenthal, Ketevan Gomelauri, Monika Zaliniyan, Carlo Enrico Traverso, Zohar Bracha, Ana Dvalishvili, Yoram Solberg, Michael Belkin, Thomas W. Samuelson

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeAllerganEuropean CommissionQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastAbbVie
KeywordsMedicineOpen angle glaucomaOphthalmologyOcular hypertensionGlaucomaRandomized controlled trialOptometrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Effective glaucoma treatment is limited by nonadherence to medications and access to selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT). The GLAUrious study compared automated, gonioscopy-free, noncontact, image-guided direct selective laser trabeculoplasty (DSLT) with conventional SLT in open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) to reduce intraocular pressure (IOP). DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, evaluator-masked noninferiority trial. PARTICIPANTS: Participants aged ≥ 40 years with OAG or OHT, on 0-3 hypotensive medications at screening, and washout IOP of 22-35 mmHg at 14 centers. METHODS: After washout, 192 participants randomized 1:1 to DSLT (n = 99) or SLT (n = 93). Intraocular pressure was assessed before treatment and through 12 months after the procedure, with washout IOP at baseline and 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Difference between DSLT and SLT in mean IOP change from baseline to 6 months (noninferiority margin, -1.95 mmHg). Exploratory efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed over 12 months. RESULTS: Of 156 participants (81.3%) without major protocol deviations analyzed at 6 months, the mean ± standard error (SE) washout IOP reduction from baseline was 5.5 ± 0.5 mmHg (-20.6%) after DSLT and 6.2 ± 0.5 mmHg (-23.6%) after SLT. The between-group difference (SLT-DSLT) in mean IOP reduction was -0.7 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.2 to 0.8 mmHg; P = 0.09 [not significant] for noninferiority). Of 161 participants (83.9%) without major protocol deviations analyzed at 12 months, mean ± SE nonwashout IOP reduction from screening was 3.2 ± 0.4 mmHg (-12.2%) after DSLT and 3.2 ± 0.4 mmHg (-9.4%) after SLT. The between-group difference in mean IOP reduction was 0.01 mmHg (95% CI, -1.1 to 1.1 mmHg; P < 0.001 for noninferiority). Safety profiles were similar between groups, although clinically nonsignificant punctate subconjunctival hemorrhage was more frequent in the DSLT group. Ocular AEs generally were mild and resolved without intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-month primary end point did not achieve statistical noninferiority compared with conventional SLT. Nonetheless, DSLT was well tolerated and provided an effective reduction in IOP that was sustained for 12 months. Failure to demonstrate noninferiority does not prove inferiority; DSLT remains an effective option in the early treatment paradigm and can be considered as a first-line treatment when SLT is not readily accessible. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmologySame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207