Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40801672›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2025

Evaluating the Progression of Retinal Sensitivity Loss in Geographic Atrophy Using Machine-Learning-Based Structure-Function Correlation (OMEGA 2).

Georg Ansari, Nils Schärer, Kristina Pfau, Philippe Valmaggia, Chrysoula Gabrani, Hanna Zuche, Andrea Giani, Marieh Esmaeelpour, Taffeta Chingning Yamaguchi, Nicolas Feltgen and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Geographic atrophy in age-related macular degeneration: phenotypic characterisation for clinical trial consideration.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  6. Visual Function Assessment in Geographic Atrophy: A Review.Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Georg AnsariInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Nils SchärerInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Kristina PfauDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Philippe ValmaggiaInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Chrysoula GabraniInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Hanna ZucheInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Andrea GianiBoehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
Marieh EsmaeelpourBoehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
Taffeta Chingning YamaguchiBoehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
Nicolas FeltgenInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Peter M MalocaInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Leopold SchmettererInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Hendrik P N SchollInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.
Maximilian PfauInstitute of Molecular and Clinical Ophthalmology Basel (IOB), Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of different machine-learning models in predicting retinal sensitivity in geographic atrophy (GA) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and compare the progression of sensitivity loss using observed versus inferred data over time. Methods: Thirty patients with GA (37 eyes) were recruited for the OMEGA study. Participants underwent fundus-controlled perimetry (microperimetry) and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) imaging at baseline and follow-up visits at weeks 12, 24, and 48. Retinal layers were segmented using a custom-written deep-learning algorithm. We used various machine-learning models, including random forest, LASSO regression, and multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), to predict retinal sensitivity across three scenarios: (1) unknown patients, (2) known patients at later visits, and (3) interpolation within visits. Predictive accuracy was evaluated using the mean absolute error (MAE), and the models' ability to reduce test variability over time was analyzed using linear mixed models. Results: The random forest model demonstrated the highest accuracy across all scenarios, with an MAE of 3.67 decibels (dB) for unknown patients, 2.96 dB for known patients at follow-up, and 3.10 dB for within-visit interpolation. The inferred sensitivity data significantly reduced variability compared to the observed data in longitudinal mixed model analysis, with a residual variance of 2.72 dB² versus 8.67 dB², respectively. Conclusions: Machine-learning models, particularly the random forest model, effectively predict retinal sensitivity in patients with GA, with patient-specific baseline data improving accuracy for subsequent visits. Inferred sensitivity mapping presents a reliable, functional surrogate endpoint for clinical trials, offering high spatial resolution without extensive psychophysical testing.

Indexed as

Geographic AtrophyMachine LearningRetinaVisual FieldsAgedAged, 80 and overDisease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedTomography, Optical CoherenceVisual AcuityVisual Field Tests

Identifiers

PMID40801672
PMCPMC12366863

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.