June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
Macular rod and cone photoreceptor structure in patients with X-linked cone dysfunction
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Emily J Patterson
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Angelos Kalitzeos
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Thomas Kane
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Navjit Singh
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Melissa Kasilian
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Jessica C Gardner
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Jay Neitz
    University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States
  • Maureen Neitz
    University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States
  • Alison J Hardcastle
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Joseph Carroll
    Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States
  • Michel Michaelides
    Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, London, United Kingdom
    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Emily Patterson, None; Angelos Kalitzeos, None; Thomas Kane, None; Navjit Singh, None; Melissa Kasilian, None; Jessica Gardner, None; Jay Neitz, None; Maureen Neitz, None; Alison Hardcastle, None; Joseph Carroll, AGTC (F), MeiraGTx (C), MeiraGTx (F), OptoVue (F), Translational Imaging Innovations (I); Michel Michaelides, MeiraGTx (C)
  • Footnotes
    Support  Dr. Sarno of the BCM Families Foundation, R01EY017607, UL1TR001436.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 1879. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Emily J Patterson, Angelos Kalitzeos, Thomas Kane, Navjit Singh, Melissa Kasilian, Jessica C Gardner, Jay Neitz, Maureen Neitz, Alison J Hardcastle, Joseph Carroll, Michel Michaelides; Macular rod and cone photoreceptor structure in patients with X-linked cone dysfunction. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):1879.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : X-linked cone dysfunction has been shown to cause variable structural and functional disruption of the long (L) and/or middle (M) wavelength-sensitive cone mosaic. Although the condition is considered to be isolated to L and M cones, the effect, or lake thereof, on rod density has not yet been confirmed. Adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy (AOSLO) enables in vivo visualization of the photoreceptor mosaic. Here we quantify the density of rods – derived from the density recovery profile (DRP) – and cones within the macula in patients who do not have normal L or M opsin, and thereby present with symptoms of blue cone monochromacy.

Methods : Eight patients (aged 16 to 51 years) with quantifiable parafoveal AOSLO images were selected for analysis. All patients had genetically confirmed mutations affecting both L/M opsin genes: four had the Cys203Arg missense mutation, three had abnormal exon-3 haplotypes (two with LVVVA; one with MIAVA + LIAVA), and one had a deletion of the locus control region (LCR). Where possible, rods and cones were counted (using confocal and split-detection AOSLO images respectively) in 1° increments from 3° to 10° along the temporal meridian.

Results : Although the overall mean (SD; n) cone density (cones/mm2) was reduced from normal, ranging from 6,446 (5,817; 4) at 3° to 1,750 (636; 2) at 10°, there were differences between the genotypes, with Cys203Arg trending towards lower cone density (Fig 1). Mean (SD; n) cone-corrected DRP-derived estimates of rod density (rods/mm2) ranged from 54,383 (28,276; 5) at 4° to 81,810 (1,4621; 3) at 9°, although, again, there were genotype differences, with Cys203Arg trending towards higher rod density (Fig 2).

Conclusions : Understanding the cone and rod topography within the macula is crucial for assessing the potential impact and monitoring efficacy of future therapeutic efforts in X-linked cone dysfunction. Our data suggest that, in patients who lack expression of normal L and M opsin genes, rod density and/or distribution across the retina may be affected by genotype.

This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

 

Density of cones (direct count) in patients with X-linked cone dysfunction, grouped by genotype.

Density of cones (direct count) in patients with X-linked cone dysfunction, grouped by genotype.

 

Density of rods (estimates derived from the density recovery profile, corrected for area occupied by cones) in patients with X-linked cone dysfunction, grouped by genotype.

Density of rods (estimates derived from the density recovery profile, corrected for area occupied by cones) in patients with X-linked cone dysfunction, grouped by genotype.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×