MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Choroidal Neovascularization Associated With Birdshot Chorioretinopathy

2016· article· en· W815921261 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica G. Shantha, Vincent Y. Ho, Purnima S. Patel, Farzin Forooghian, Steven Yeh

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsMedicineChoroidal neovascularizationOphthalmologyImmunosuppressionVisual acuityRanibizumabRetrospective cohort studyNeovascularizationSurgeryBevacizumabInternal medicineChemotherapyAngiogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients with birdshot chorioretinopathy (BCR) may develop visual compromise due to choroidal neovascularization (CNV), and few series address management strategies in the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) era. The purpose of this study was to describe the clinical outcomes of combination anti-VEGF and immunosuppressive therapy for CNV associated with BCR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective, interventional case series. Patients with BCR from two tertiary uveitis and retina practices were reviewed. Patients with CNV in association with BCR were identified and reviewed in detail. Clinical features, treatments utilized (ie, anti-VEGF injections, immunosuppressive therapy), and functional and structural outcomes over long-term follow-up were recorded. Outcomes measured included Snellen visual acuity, spectral-domain optical coherence tomography macular thickness during treatment, number and type of anti-VEGF injections, the need for initiation or escalation of immunosuppression, and incidence of CNV in macula-involved versus macula-sparing BCR. RESULTS: Four of 36 BCR patients were diagnosed with choroidal neovascularization (11%). Identification of CNV in all patients prompted treatment with intravitreal anti-VEGF injections and an increase or initiation of local or systemic immunosuppression. Mean Snellen visual acuity improved from 20/60 to 20/30 at final follow-up (P = .02). Mean central subfield thickness improved from 443 μ to 254 μ (P = .04). CNV in association with BCR occurred at a rate of 0.11 events per patient-year (95% CI, 0.02-0.31) in macula-involved BCR versus zero events/patient-year in macula-spared BCR (95% CI, 0-0.058; P = .009). CONCLUSION: Anti-VEGF therapy was effective for the treatment of CNV in BCR patients. A combination of systemic or local immunosuppression and anti-VEGF therapy may be useful in the management of CNV associated with BCR. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2016;47:450-457.].

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retinaSame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207