PubMed · 13850713
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
H GOLDMANN, M FAVRE. [Physiological amblyopia].. https://doi.org/10.1159/000303722
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To identify genetic variants associated with amblyopia in African (AFR) and Admixed American (AMR) ancestry groups, expanding on previous studies conducted in European ancestry. DESIGN: Retrospective ancestry-stratified genome-wide association study (GWAS) and gene-level rare variant association study (RVAS). PARTICIPANTS: Participants in the All of Us Research Program from AFR and AMR ancestry groups who had whole-genome sequencing available. Cases and controls were distinguished based on the presence of International Classification of Diseases 9/10/SNOMED diagnosis codes for amblyopia in electronic health records. This yielded ancestry-stratified subsets of 269 cases and 71 585 controls of AMR ancestry and 366 cases and 79 460 controls of AFR ancestry. METHODS: Stratified logistic regression models were adjusted for age, biological sex, and the top 10 principal components of genomic ancestry. GWAS was limited to common variants (minor allele frequency ≥1%), and RVAS was limited to rare variants with coding sequence-altering effects (minor allele frequency >1%, exonic only, excluding synonymous variants) aggregated at the gene level using the SKAT algorithm. Downstream analyses of the significant variants were performed using KEGG and GO pathway analysis and STRING database queries for protein-protein interactions and gene-gene interactions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Single-nucleotide polymorphisms were determined to have genome-wide significance if P < 5e-8 in the GWAS, and genes were determined to have significant association with amblyopia in the RVAS if P < 8.0 × 10-4. RESULTS: In the AMR GWAS, 245 unique single-nucleotide polymorphisms mapping to 97 distinct loci were identified, notably within neurodevelopmental and axonal guidance genes, including ROBO1, SEMA4B, PTPRD, NRXN1, and CAMK2D. The AFR GWAS identified 11 significant variants corresponding to 6 loci mapping primarily to long noncoding RNAs and pseudogenes. The AMR RVAS identified 15 genes, including axonal transport genes (KIF1B and KIF7) and growth factor signaling genes (EGF, ERBIN, and AKAP17A). The AFR RVAS identified a single gene, DLG2, which encodes the postsynaptic protein PSD-93, which promotes the closure of the sensitive period of neuroplasticity for vision in early childhood. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic risk architectures for amblyopia differ across ancestries but fundamentally converge on neurodevelopmental signaling, cortical synapse assembly, and sensitive period plasticity rather than ocular structural dynamics. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVES: To test the efficacy of treatment for unilateral visual loss detected by preschool vision screening and the extent to which effectiveness varies with initial severity. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial of full treatment with glasses and patching, if required, compared with glasses only or no treatment. Masked assessment of best corrected acuity after one year of follow up. SETTING: Eight UK eye departments. PARTICIPANTS: 177 children aged 3-5 years with mild to moderate unilateral impairment of acuity (6/9 to 6/36) detected by screening. RESULTS: Children in the full and glasses treatment groups had incrementally better visual acuity at follow up than children who received no treatment, but the mean treatment effect between full and no treatment was equivalent to only one line on a Snellen chart (0.11 log units; 95% confidence interval 0.050 to 0.171; P < 0.0001). The effects of treatment depended on initial acuity: full treatment showed a substantial effect in the moderate acuity group (6/36 to 6/18 at recruitment) and no significant effect in the mild acuity group (6/9 to 6/12 at recruitment) (P = 0.006 for linear regression interaction term). For 64 children with moderate acuity loss the treatment effect was 0.20 log units, equivalent to one to two lines on a Snellen chart. When all children had received treatment, six months after the end of the trial, there was no significant difference in acuity between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment is worth while in children with the poorest acuity, but in children with mild (6/9 to 6/12) unilateral acuity loss there was little benefit. Delay in treatment until the age of 5 did not seem to influence effectiveness.