June 2023
Volume 64, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2023
Comparison of fundus photography, autofluorescence, and infrared imaging in various phenotypic features of geographic atrophy
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Noor Chahal
    Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California, United States
  • Liangbo Linus Shen
    Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California, United States
  • Jeremy Keenan
    Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California, United States
  • Glenn Yiu
    Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, University of California Davis, Davis, California, United States
  • Jay M. Stewart
    Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Noor Chahal None; Liangbo Shen None; Jeremy Keenan None; Glenn Yiu Abbvie, Adverum, Alimera, Bausch & Lomb, Clearside, Endogena, Genentech, Gyroscope, Intergalactic, Iridex, Janssen, Myro, NGM Bio, Novartis, Regeneron, Thea, Topcon, Zeiss, Code C (Consultant/Contractor); Jay Stewart Zeiss, Merck, Valitor, Long Bridge, Twenty Twenty, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Long Bridge, Code I (Personal Financial Interest), Roche, Code R (Recipient)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2023, Vol.64, 2168. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Noor Chahal, Liangbo Linus Shen, Jeremy Keenan, Glenn Yiu, Jay M. Stewart; Comparison of fundus photography, autofluorescence, and infrared imaging in various phenotypic features of geographic atrophy. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2023;64(8):2168.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : We aimed to evaluate the agreement between color fundus photography (CFP), fundus autofluorescence (FAF), and infrared reflectance (IR) measurements of geographic atrophy (GA) with an emphasis on relationship with phenotypic GA features.

Methods : We analyzed CFP (n=170), FAF (n=185), and IR (n=185) images from 128 eyes with GA in 77 patients in the METformin FOR the MINimization of GA clinical trial. GA area was measured by 2 independent, masked graders, and FAF images were graded manually (FAF-M) and semi-automatically (FAF-SA) using the RegionFinder software (Heidelberg Engineering). We stratified images by GA focality, homogeneity, size, and color (Figure) to determine if significant differences in measurements exist between FAF-SA and the other methods.

Results : The GA area measured in CFP, FAF-M, FAF-SA, and IR images was 9.18 ± 8.11, 8.75 ± 7.32, 7.02 ± 5.52, and 8.76 ± 7.37 mm2, respectively. All 4 methods had excellent inter-grader agreement (intraclass correlation coefficients>0.99) within the same modality. GA measured with FAF-SA was lower than CFP (P=0.001), FAF-M (P=0.004), and IR (P=0.003) (Table). The relationship persisted in unifocal, multifocal, and non-homogeneous GA lesions. In homogeneous GA lesions (n=53), FAF-SA was not significantly different from CFP (difference = -0.88 ± 1.27 mm2; P=0.06), FAF-M (-0.51 ± 0.68 mm2; P=0.27), and IR (-0.45 ± 0.71 mm2; P=0.21). Gray GA lesions (n=5) had the highest cross-modality differences when compared to FAF-SA: -6.29 ± 5.18 mm2 (CFP), -8.43 ± 1.96 mm2 (FAF-M), and -6.41± 2.88 mm2 (IR).

Conclusions : Though each method had excellent inter-grader agreement, the measurements of GA sizes vary significantly across different modalities and GA phenotypes. GA sizes measured in FAF-SA were significantly lower than in other imaging modalities. Future clinicians and researchers should use a single, consistent modality for disease monitoring and progression.

This abstract was presented at the 2023 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in New Orleans, LA, April 23-27, 2023.

 

Figure. Panel 1: CFP (1A), FAF-M (1B), FAF-SA (1C), and IR (1D). Panel 2: GA phenotypes. 2A, Homogeneous, black, unifocal GA lesion. 2B, Multifocal lesion. 2C, Non-homogeneous lesion with mixed hypo- and hyperautofluorescence within the GA. 2D, Gray GA lesion.

Figure. Panel 1: CFP (1A), FAF-M (1B), FAF-SA (1C), and IR (1D). Panel 2: GA phenotypes. 2A, Homogeneous, black, unifocal GA lesion. 2B, Multifocal lesion. 2C, Non-homogeneous lesion with mixed hypo- and hyperautofluorescence within the GA. 2D, Gray GA lesion.

 

Table. Top: Number of images used in cross-modality analysis. Diagonal: Mean absolute difference (MAD) between graders within the same modality. Bottom: Cross-modality difference (D) of modality A - modality B.

Table. Top: Number of images used in cross-modality analysis. Diagonal: Mean absolute difference (MAD) between graders within the same modality. Bottom: Cross-modality difference (D) of modality A - modality B.

×
×

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.

×