Vesti Eija, Johnson Chris A, Chauhan Balwantray C
Discoveries in Sight, Devers Eye Institute, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Sep;44(9):3873-9. doi: 10.1167/iovs.02-1171.
To compare the performance characteristics of seven methods for analyzing glaucomatous visual field progression, using a combination of real patient data and computer simulation techniques.
The initial and final visual field results, separated by 7 years and measured with the full-threshold 30-2 program of the Humphrey Field Analyzer (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) of 76 patients with open-angle glaucoma were used. A computer simulation program generated 14 interim semiannual visual fields under conditions of high, moderate, and no variability. Progression was analyzed using the methods of the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS), the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS), three criteria based on the Glaucoma Change Probability (GCP) analysis, and two criteria based on point-wise linear regression analysis (PLRA). Specificities were calculated by using the same visual field of each patient as both the initial and final field (no progression) under conditions of moderate and high variability.
Under the no-variability condition, progression rates were 18% for the AGIS, 36% for CIGTS, 47% to 62% for the three GCP methods, and 72% and 84% for the two PLRA methods. Progression rates increased with greater variability with the three GCP methods and decreased with all other methods. The time to detect confirmed progression was longest for the PLRA methods and shortest for the CIGTS and GCP methods. Under the moderate-variability condition, all methods yielded high specificity. The AGIS, CIGTS, and one of the GCP and PLRA methods were relatively resistant to high variability and maintained high specificities.
The AGIS and CIGTS methods had high specificity, but classified fewer cases of progression than the other methods. The GCP methods determined progression earliest; however, they were generally not as specific. Methods based on PLRA were specific but times to confirmed progression were the longest.
结合真实患者数据和计算机模拟技术,比较七种分析青光眼视野进展的方法的性能特征。
使用76例开角型青光眼患者的初始和最终视野结果,间隔7年,采用Humphrey视野分析仪(卡尔蔡司医疗技术公司,加利福尼亚州都柏林)的全阈值30-2程序测量。计算机模拟程序在高、中、无变异性条件下生成14个半年期的中间视野。使用高级青光眼干预研究(AGIS)、协作初始青光眼治疗研究(CIGTS)的方法、基于青光眼变化概率(GCP)分析的三个标准以及基于逐点线性回归分析(PLRA)的两个标准分析进展情况。通过在中、高变异性条件下将每位患者的相同视野用作初始和最终视野(无进展)来计算特异性。
在无变异性条件下,AGIS的进展率为18%,CIGTS为36%,三种GCP方法为47%至62%,两种PLRA方法为72%和84%。三种GCP方法的进展率随变异性增加而升高,其他所有方法则随变异性增加而降低。检测到确诊进展的时间,PLRA方法最长,CIGTS和GCP方法最短。在中变异性条件下,所有方法均具有高特异性。AGIS、CIGTS以及GCP和PLRA方法中的一种对高变异性具有相对抗性,并保持高特异性。
AGIS和CIGTS方法具有高特异性,但与其他方法相比,进展病例分类较少。GCP方法最早确定进展;然而,它们通常特异性较低。基于PLRA的方法具有特异性,但确诊进展的时间最长。