KCNV2-associated retinopathy: genotype–phenotype correlations –KCNV2study group report 3
Rattachement africain : gb, mx, jp, ca, de, in, il, nl, es, us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND/AIMS: retinopathy. METHODS: variants-two loss-of-function (TLOF), two missense (TM) or one of each (MLOF)-and parameters were compared. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were included. The mean age of onset (mean±SD) in TLOF (n=55), TM (n=23) and MLOF (n=14) groups was 3.51±0.58, 4.07±2.76 and 5.54±3.38 years, respectively. The mean LogMAR BCVA (±SD) at baseline in TLOF, TM and MLOF groups was 0.89±0.25, 0.67±0.38 and 0.81±0.35 for right, and 0.88±0.26, 0.69±0.33 and 0.78±0.33 for left eyes, respectively. The difference in BCVA between groups at baseline was significant in right (p=0.03) and left eyes (p=0.035). Mean outer nuclear layer thickness (±SD) at baseline in TLOF, MLOF and TM groups was 37.07±15.20 µm, 40.67±12.53 and 40.38±18.67, respectively, which was not significantly different (p=0.85). The mean ellipsoid zone width (EZW) loss (±SD) was 2051 µm (±1318) for patients in the TLOF, and 1314 µm (±965) for MLOF. Only one patient in the TM group had EZW loss at presentation. There was considerable overlap in ERG findings, although the largest DA 10 ERG b-waves were associated with TLOF and the smallest with TM variants. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with missense alterations had better BCVA and greater structural integrity. This is important for patient prognostication and counselling, as well as stratification for future gene therapy trials.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé, mais le titre doit être comparé manuellement.
- Titre Crossref
- <i>KCNV2</i>-associated retinopathy: genotype–phenotype correlations –<i>KCNV2</i>study group report 3
- Date Crossref
- 18/10/2023
- Éditeur
- BMJ
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.