ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Aqueous Humor Proteomics Reveals the Molecular Basis for Differential Treatment Responses in nAMD and pmCNV.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Choroidal neovascularization (CNV) causes vision loss in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and pathologic myopia-related CNV (pmCNV). Despite shared clinical features, they respond differently to treatment. This study compared aqueous humor (AH) proteomic profiles of nAMD and pmCNV to identify biomarkers and mechanisms of CNV formation. Methods: AH samples were collected from eyes with nAMD, pmCNV, age-related cataract controls, and pathologic myopia without CNV. Label-free data-independent acquisition (DIA) mass spectrometry was used for proteomic profiling. Differentially expressed proteins were identified using limma models adjusted for age, sex, and axial length. Functional enrichment analyses used Gene Ontology (GO), Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), and Reactome databases. Stability-based feature selection, LightGBM modeling, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) prioritized discriminative proteins; selected findings were evaluated in an independent nAMD-control Olink cohort. Results: DIA proteomics identified 3986 proteins, of which 3667 passed quality filtering. nAMD and pmCNV showed weakly correlated proteomic alterations (r2 = 0.061), with 385 nAMD-specific, 398 pmCNV-specific, and 100 shared altered proteins. nAMD was characterized by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF/VEGF receptor [VEGFR]) pathway activation and reduced glucose-metabolism-related proteins, whereas pmCNV showed extracellular matrix remodeling, platelet/coagulation activation, and downregulation of Slit/Robo-related neurovascular guidance pathways. The stability-selected LightGBM model using 33 proteins achieved a macro-average area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92. SHAP analysis highlighted VEGFR2 (KDR) and VEGFA as major nAMD-associated drivers, and Olink validation showed concordant expression trends for six selected proteins. Conclusions: nAMD and pmCNV exhibit largely distinct AH proteomic signatures, supporting different molecular mechanisms of CNV formation and anti-VEGF responsiveness. AH proteomics may help prioritize subtype-specific candidate biomarkers, warranting further validation across independent cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.