Cluster Analysis and Genotype-Phenotype Assessment of Geographic Atrophy in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 Report 25

年龄相关性黄斑变性中地图状萎缩的聚类分析和基因型-表型评估:年龄相关性眼病研究2报告25

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: To explore whether phenotypes in geographic atrophy (GA) secondary to age-related macular degeneration can be separated into 2 or more partially distinct subtypes and if these have different genetic associations. This is important because distinct GA subtypes associated with different genetic factors might require customized therapeutic approaches. DESIGN: Cluster analysis of participants within a controlled clinical trial, followed by assessment of phenotype-genotype associations. PARTICIPANTS: Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 participants with incident GA during study follow-up: 598 eyes of 598 participants. METHODS: Phenotypic features from reading center grading of fundus photographs were subjected to cluster analysis, by k-means and hierarchical methods, in cross-sectional analyses (using 15 phenotypic features) and longitudinal analyses (using 14 phenotypic features). The identified clusters were compared by 4 pathway-based genetic risk scores (complement, extracellular matrix, lipid, and ARMS2). The analyses were repeated in reverse (clustering by genotype and comparison by phenotype). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics and quality of cluster solutions, assessed by Calinski-Harabasz scores, unexplained variance, and consistency; and genotype-phenotype associations, assessed by t test. RESULTS: In cross-sectional phenotypic analyses, k-means identified 2 clusters (labeled A and B), whereas hierarchical clustering identified 4 clusters (C-F); cluster membership differed principally by GA configuration but in few other ways. In longitudinal phenotypic analyses, k-means identified 2 clusters (G and H) that differed principally by smoking status but in few other ways. These 3 sets of cluster divisions were not similar to each other (r ≤ 0.20). Despite adequate power, pairwise cluster comparison by the 4 genetic risk scores demonstrated no significant differences (P > 0.05 for all). In clustering by genotype, k-means identified 2 clusters (I and J). These differed principally at ARMS2, but no significant genotype-phenotype associations were observed (P > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Phenotypic clustering resulted in GA subtypes defined principally by GA configuration in cross-sectional analyses, but these were not replicated in longitudinal analyses. These negative findings, together with the absence of significant phenotype-genotype associations, indicate that GA phenotypes may vary continuously across a spectrum, rather than consisting of distinct subtypes that arise from separate genetic causes.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。