June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
Machine learning-estimated axial length is better than spherical equivalent for identifying higher-risk myopic eyes
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Gareth Lingham
    Centre for Eye Research Ireland, Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
    Department of Ophthalmology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
  • James Loughman
    Centre for Eye Research Ireland, Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  • Eoin Kerin
    Centre for Eye Research Ireland, Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  • Samantha Sze-Yee Lee
    Centre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science (incorporating Lions Eye Institute), The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • David A Mackey
    Centre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science (incorporating Lions Eye Institute), The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • Siofra Harrington
    School of Physics and Optometric and Clinical Sciences, Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  • Kathryn Jill Saunders
    School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, Londonderry, United Kingdom
  • Daniel Ian Flitcroft
    Centre for Eye Research Ireland, Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
    Department of Ophthalmology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Gareth Lingham None; James Loughman Dopavision, Ocuco, Ebiga Vision, Kubota Vision, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Vyluma, Alliance Pharmaceuticals, Dopavision, Coopervision, Kubota Vision, Code F (Financial Support), Ocumetra Limited, Code O (Owner), Ocumetra Limited, Code P (Patent); Eoin Kerin None; Samantha Lee None; David Mackey None; Siofra Harrington None; Kathryn Saunders Essilor, Hoya, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Vyluma, Hoya, Code F (Financial Support); Daniel Flitcroft Essilor, Johnson & Johnson, Coopervision, Kubota Vision, Thea, Vivior, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Vyluma, Dopavision, Coopervision, Ocumension, Code F (Financial Support), Ocumetra Limited, Code O (Owner), Ocumetra Limited, Code P (Patent)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 4336 – A0041. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Gareth Lingham, James Loughman, Eoin Kerin, Samantha Sze-Yee Lee, David A Mackey, Siofra Harrington, Kathryn Jill Saunders, Daniel Ian Flitcroft; Machine learning-estimated axial length is better than spherical equivalent for identifying higher-risk myopic eyes. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):4336 – A0041.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To assess the performance of a machine learning-based algorithm in estimating axial length (AL) based on refraction and demographic data.

Methods : A machine learning-based algorithm (AL estimator) was trained using age, sex, spherical refractive error, astigmatism and corneal radius of curvature data derived from 4403 participants (aged 6-22 years) of Irish and Korean epidemiological studies. AL estimator performance was tested using right eye AL data from participants involved in myopia treatment trials (three Irish, one Australian). Bland-Altman statistics and linear regression were used to compare estimated and actual AL. Receiver operator characteristic analysis was used to assess the ability of the AL estimator to identify children with a high AL (≥26mm) and fast progressors (≥0.3mm axial elongation in 12 months), compared to spherical equivalent (SE).

Results : The AL estimator was tested on 507 participants (n=354, 69.8% Irish), of whom 437 (86%) had 12-month follow-up data [mean age: 11.3 years, range: 6-17; female: 304 (60%); mean AL: 24.8mm, range: 22.1-28.9]. Using baseline visit data, the mean difference in AL (actual – estimated) was -0.07mm (95% limits of agreement [LOA]: -0.97, 0.83; absolute mean error=0.36; R2=0.80). When assessing 12-month AL progression, the mean difference between actual and estimated AL change was -0.001mm (LOA: -0.31, 0.31; absolute mean error=0.12; R2=0.57). The AL estimator performed worse for Australian compared to Irish participants (respective mean errors: AL estimate=-0.16 vs -0.03mm, p=0.003; AL change=-0.04 vs 0.02, p=0.001). Compared to SE alone, the AL estimator was better at identifying eyes with an AL ≥26mm (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.97 vs 0.83) and eyes that progressed ≥0.3mm over 12 months (AUC: 0.90 vs 0.85; Figure 1).

Conclusions : In this cohort of myopic children, the machine learning model was able to provide a reasonably accurate estimation of actual AL. Importantly, the AL estimator demonstrated high diagnostic performance in identifying individuals with long AL and those who exhibited excessive axial elongation. Where biometry is unavailable, the AL estimator may represent a useful clinical tool for identifying children at risk of axial growth-related complications of myopia.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

 

Figure 1: ROC curves of (a) estimated axial length [AL] and (b) AL change for AL estimator vs spherical equivalent AUC: area under curve

Figure 1: ROC curves of (a) estimated axial length [AL] and (b) AL change for AL estimator vs spherical equivalent AUC: area under curve

×
×

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.

×