1
|
Staplin N, Haynes R, Judge PK, Wanner C, Green JB, Emberson J, Preiss D, Mayne KJ, Ng SYA, Sammons E, Zhu D, Hill M, Stevens W, Wallendszus K, Brenner S, Cheung AK, Liu ZH, Li J, Hooi LS, Liu WJ, Kadowaki T, Nangaku M, Levin A, Cherney D, Maggioni AP, Pontremoli R, Deo R, Goto S, Rossello X, Tuttle KR, Steubl D, Petrini M, Seidi S, Landray MJ, Baigent C, Herrington WG, Abat S, Abd Rahman R, Abdul Cader R, Abdul Hafidz MI, Abdul Wahab MZ, Abdullah NK, Abdul-Samad T, Abe M, Abraham N, Acheampong S, Achiri P, Acosta JA, Adeleke A, Adell V, Adewuyi-Dalton R, Adnan N, Africano A, Agharazii M, Aguilar F, Aguilera A, Ahmad M, Ahmad MK, Ahmad NA, Ahmad NH, Ahmad NI, Ahmad Miswan N, Ahmad Rosdi H, Ahmed I, Ahmed S, Ahmed S, Aiello J, Aitken A, AitSadi R, Aker S, Akimoto S, Akinfolarin A, Akram S, Alberici F, Albert C, Aldrich L, Alegata M, Alexander L, Alfaress S, Alhadj Ali M, Ali A, Ali A, Alicic R, Aliu A, Almaraz R, Almasarwah R, Almeida J, Aloisi A, Al-Rabadi L, Alscher D, Alvarez P, Al-Zeer B, Amat M, Ambrose C, Ammar H, An Y, Andriaccio L, Ansu K, Apostolidi A, Arai N, Araki H, Araki S, Arbi A, Arechiga O, Armstrong S, Arnold T, Aronoff S, Arriaga W, Arroyo J, Arteaga D, Asahara S, Asai A, Asai N, Asano S, Asawa M, Asmee MF, Aucella F, Augustin M, Avery A, Awad A, Awang IY, Awazawa M, Axler A, Ayub W, Azhari Z, Baccaro R, Badin C, Bagwell B, Bahlmann-Kroll E, Bahtar AZ, Baigent C, Bains D, Bajaj H, Baker R, Baldini E, Banas B, Banerjee D, Banno S, Bansal S, Barberi S, Barnes S, Barnini C, Barot C, Barrett K, Barrios R, Bartolomei Mecatti B, Barton I, Barton J, Basily W, Bavanandan S, Baxter A, Becker L, Beddhu S, Beige J, Beigh S, Bell S, Benck U, Beneat A, Bennett A, Bennett D, Benyon S, Berdeprado J, Bergler T, Bergner A, Berry M, Bevilacqua M, Bhairoo J, Bhandari S, Bhandary N, Bhatt A, Bhattarai M, Bhavsar M, Bian W, Bianchini F, Bianco S, Bilous R, Bilton J, Bilucaglia D, Bird C, Birudaraju D, Biscoveanu M, Blake C, Bleakley N, Bocchicchia K, Bodine S, Bodington R, Boedecker S, Bolduc M, Bolton S, Bond C, Boreky F, Boren K, Bouchi R, Bough L, Bovan D, Bowler C, Bowman L, Brar N, Braun C, Breach A, Breitenfeldt M, Brenner S, Brettschneider B, Brewer A, Brewer G, Brindle V, Brioni E, Brown C, Brown H, Brown L, Brown R, Brown S, Browne D, Bruce K, Brueckmann M, Brunskill N, Bryant M, Brzoska M, Bu Y, Buckman C, Budoff M, Bullen M, Burke A, Burnette S, Burston C, Busch M, Bushnell J, Butler S, Büttner C, Byrne C, Caamano A, Cadorna J, Cafiero C, Cagle M, Cai J, Calabrese K, Calvi C, Camilleri B, Camp S, Campbell D, Campbell R, Cao H, Capelli I, Caple M, Caplin B, Cardone A, Carle J, Carnall V, Caroppo M, Carr S, Carraro G, Carson M, Casares P, Castillo C, Castro C, Caudill B, Cejka V, Ceseri M, Cham L, Chamberlain A, Chambers J, Chan CBT, Chan JYM, Chan YC, Chang E, Chang E, Chant T, Chavagnon T, Chellamuthu P, Chen F, Chen J, Chen P, Chen TM, Chen Y, Chen Y, Cheng C, Cheng H, Cheng MC, Cherney D, Cheung AK, Ching CH, Chitalia N, Choksi R, Chukwu C, Chung K, Cianciolo G, Cipressa L, Clark S, Clarke H, Clarke R, Clarke S, Cleveland B, Cole E, Coles H, Condurache L, Connor A, Convery K, Cooper A, Cooper N, Cooper Z, Cooperman L, Cosgrove L, Coutts P, Cowley A, Craik R, Cui G, Cummins T, Dahl N, Dai H, Dajani L, D'Amelio A, Damian E, Damianik K, Danel L, Daniels C, Daniels T, Darbeau S, Darius H, Dasgupta T, Davies J, Davies L, Davis A, Davis J, Davis L, Dayanandan R, Dayi S, Dayrell R, De Nicola L, Debnath S, Deeb W, Degenhardt S, DeGoursey K, Delaney M, Deo R, DeRaad R, Derebail V, Dev D, Devaux M, Dhall P, Dhillon G, Dienes J, Dobre M, Doctolero E, Dodds V, Domingo D, Donaldson D, Donaldson P, Donhauser C, Donley V, Dorestin S, Dorey S, Doulton T, Draganova D, Draxlbauer K, Driver F, Du H, Dube F, Duck T, Dugal T, Dugas J, Dukka H, Dumann H, Durham W, Dursch M, Dykas R, Easow R, Eckrich E, Eden G, Edmerson E, Edwards H, Ee LW, Eguchi J, Ehrl Y, Eichstadt K, Eid W, Eilerman B, Ejima Y, Eldon H, Ellam T, Elliott L, Ellison R, Emberson J, Epp R, Er A, Espino-Obrero M, Estcourt S, Estienne L, Evans G, Evans J, Evans S, Fabbri G, Fajardo-Moser M, Falcone C, Fani F, Faria-Shayler P, Farnia F, Farrugia D, Fechter M, Fellowes D, Feng F, Fernandez J, Ferraro P, Field A, Fikry S, Finch J, Finn H, Fioretto P, Fish R, Fleischer A, Fleming-Brown D, Fletcher L, Flora R, Foellinger C, Foligno N, Forest S, Forghani Z, Forsyth K, Fottrell-Gould D, Fox P, Frankel A, Fraser D, Frazier R, Frederick K, Freking N, French H, Froment A, Fuchs B, Fuessl L, Fujii H, Fujimoto A, Fujita A, Fujita K, Fujita Y, Fukagawa M, Fukao Y, Fukasawa A, Fuller T, Funayama T, Fung E, Furukawa M, Furukawa Y, Furusho M, Gabel S, Gaidu J, Gaiser S, Gallo K, Galloway C, Gambaro G, Gan CC, Gangemi C, Gao M, Garcia K, Garcia M, Garofalo C, Garrity M, Garza A, Gasko S, Gavrila M, Gebeyehu B, Geddes A, Gentile G, George A, George J, Gesualdo L, Ghalli F, Ghanem A, Ghate T, Ghavampour S, Ghazi A, Gherman A, Giebeln-Hudnell U, Gill B, Gillham S, Girakossyan I, Girndt M, Giuffrida A, Glenwright M, Glider T, Gloria R, Glowski D, Goh BL, Goh CB, Gohda T, Goldenberg R, Goldfaden R, Goldsmith C, Golson B, Gonce V, Gong Q, Goodenough B, Goodwin N, Goonasekera M, Gordon A, Gordon J, Gore A, Goto H, Goto S, Goto S, Gowen D, Grace A, Graham J, Grandaliano G, Gray M, Green JB, Greene T, Greenwood G, Grewal B, Grifa R, Griffin D, Griffin S, Grimmer P, Grobovaite E, Grotjahn S, Guerini A, Guest C, Gunda S, Guo B, Guo Q, Haack S, Haase M, Haaser K, Habuki K, Hadley A, Hagan S, Hagge S, Haller H, Ham S, Hamal S, Hamamoto Y, Hamano N, Hamm M, Hanburry A, Haneda M, Hanf C, Hanif W, Hansen J, Hanson L, Hantel S, Haraguchi T, Harding E, Harding T, Hardy C, Hartner C, Harun Z, Harvill L, Hasan A, Hase H, Hasegawa F, Hasegawa T, Hashimoto A, Hashimoto C, Hashimoto M, Hashimoto S, Haskett S, Hauske SJ, Hawfield A, Hayami T, Hayashi M, Hayashi S, Haynes R, Hazara A, Healy C, Hecktman J, Heine G, Henderson H, Henschel R, Hepditch A, Herfurth K, Hernandez G, Hernandez Pena A, Hernandez-Cassis C, Herrington WG, Herzog C, Hewins S, Hewitt D, Hichkad L, Higashi S, Higuchi C, Hill C, Hill L, Hill M, Himeno T, Hing A, Hirakawa Y, Hirata K, Hirota Y, Hisatake T, Hitchcock S, Hodakowski A, Hodge W, Hogan R, Hohenstatt U, Hohenstein B, Hooi L, Hope S, Hopley M, Horikawa S, Hosein D, Hosooka T, Hou L, Hou W, Howie L, Howson A, Hozak M, Htet Z, Hu X, Hu Y, Huang J, Huda N, Hudig L, Hudson A, Hugo C, Hull R, Hume L, Hundei W, Hunt N, Hunter A, Hurley S, Hurst A, Hutchinson C, Hyo T, Ibrahim FH, Ibrahim S, Ihana N, Ikeda T, Imai A, Imamine R, Inamori A, Inazawa H, Ingell J, Inomata K, Inukai Y, Ioka M, Irtiza-Ali A, Isakova T, Isari W, Iselt M, Ishiguro A, Ishihara K, Ishikawa T, Ishimoto T, Ishizuka K, Ismail R, Itano S, Ito H, Ito K, Ito M, Ito Y, Iwagaitsu S, Iwaita Y, Iwakura T, Iwamoto M, Iwasa M, Iwasaki H, Iwasaki S, Izumi K, Izumi K, Izumi T, Jaafar SM, Jackson C, Jackson Y, Jafari G, Jahangiriesmaili M, Jain N, Jansson K, Jasim H, Jeffers L, Jenkins A, Jesky M, Jesus-Silva J, Jeyarajah D, Jiang Y, Jiao X, Jimenez G, Jin B, Jin Q, Jochims J, Johns B, Johnson C, Johnson T, Jolly S, Jones L, Jones L, Jones S, Jones T, Jones V, Joseph M, Joshi S, Judge P, Junejo N, Junus S, Kachele M, Kadowaki T, Kadoya H, Kaga H, Kai H, Kajio H, Kaluza-Schilling W, Kamaruzaman L, Kamarzarian A, Kamimura Y, Kamiya H, Kamundi C, Kan T, Kanaguchi Y, Kanazawa A, Kanda E, Kanegae S, Kaneko K, Kaneko K, Kang HY, Kano T, Karim M, Karounos D, Karsan W, Kasagi R, Kashihara N, Katagiri H, Katanosaka A, Katayama A, Katayama M, Katiman E, Kato K, Kato M, Kato N, Kato S, Kato T, Kato Y, Katsuda Y, Katsuno T, Kaufeld J, Kavak Y, Kawai I, Kawai M, Kawai M, Kawase A, Kawashima S, Kazory A, Kearney J, Keith B, Kellett J, Kelley S, Kershaw M, Ketteler M, Khai Q, Khairullah Q, Khandwala H, Khoo KKL, Khwaja A, Kidokoro K, Kielstein J, Kihara M, Kimber C, Kimura S, Kinashi H, Kingston H, Kinomura M, Kinsella-Perks E, Kitagawa M, Kitajima M, Kitamura S, Kiyosue A, Kiyota M, Klauser F, Klausmann G, Kmietschak W, Knapp K, Knight C, Knoppe A, Knott C, Kobayashi M, Kobayashi R, Kobayashi T, Koch M, Kodama S, Kodani N, Kogure E, Koizumi M, Kojima H, Kojo T, Kolhe N, Komaba H, Komiya T, Komori H, Kon SP, Kondo M, Kondo M, Kong W, Konishi M, Kono K, Koshino M, Kosugi T, Kothapalli B, Kozlowski T, Kraemer B, Kraemer-Guth A, Krappe J, Kraus D, Kriatselis C, Krieger C, Krish P, Kruger B, Ku Md Razi KR, Kuan Y, Kubota S, Kuhn S, Kumar P, Kume S, Kummer I, Kumuji R, Küpper A, Kuramae T, Kurian L, Kuribayashi C, Kurien R, Kuroda E, Kurose T, Kutschat A, Kuwabara N, Kuwata H, La Manna G, Lacey M, Lafferty K, LaFleur P, Lai V, Laity E, Lambert A, Landray MJ, Langlois M, Latif F, Latore E, Laundy E, Laurienti D, Lawson A, Lay M, Leal I, Leal I, Lee AK, Lee J, Lee KQ, Lee R, Lee SA, Lee YY, Lee-Barkey Y, Leonard N, Leoncini G, Leong CM, Lerario S, Leslie A, Levin A, Lewington A, Li J, Li N, Li X, Li Y, Liberti L, Liberti ME, Liew A, Liew YF, Lilavivat U, Lim SK, Lim YS, Limon E, Lin H, Lioudaki E, Liu H, Liu J, Liu L, Liu Q, Liu WJ, Liu X, Liu Z, Loader D, Lochhead H, Loh CL, Lorimer A, Loudermilk L, Loutan J, Low CK, Low CL, Low YM, Lozon Z, Lu Y, Lucci D, Ludwig U, Luker N, Lund D, Lustig R, Lyle S, Macdonald C, MacDougall I, Machicado R, MacLean D, Macleod P, Madera A, Madore F, Maeda K, Maegawa H, Maeno S, Mafham M, Magee J, Maggioni AP, Mah DY, Mahabadi V, Maiguma M, Makita Y, Makos G, Manco L, Mangiacapra R, Manley J, Mann P, Mano S, Marcotte G, Maris J, Mark P, Markau S, Markovic M, Marshall C, Martin M, Martinez C, Martinez S, Martins G, Maruyama K, Maruyama S, Marx K, Maselli A, Masengu A, Maskill A, Masumoto S, Masutani K, Matsumoto M, Matsunaga T, Matsuoka N, Matsushita M, Matthews M, Matthias S, Matvienko E, Maurer M, Maxwell P, Mayne KJ, Mazlan N, Mazlan SA, Mbuyisa A, McCafferty K, McCarroll F, McCarthy T, McClary-Wright C, McCray K, McDermott P, McDonald C, McDougall R, McHaffie E, McIntosh K, McKinley T, McLaughlin S, McLean N, McNeil L, Measor A, Meek J, Mehta A, Mehta R, Melandri M, Mené P, Meng T, Menne J, Merritt K, Merscher S, Meshykhi C, Messa P, Messinger L, Miftari N, Miller R, Miller Y, Miller-Hodges E, Minatoguchi M, Miners M, Minutolo R, Mita T, Miura Y, Miyaji M, Miyamoto S, Miyatsuka T, Miyazaki M, Miyazawa I, Mizumachi R, Mizuno M, Moffat S, Mohamad Nor FS, Mohamad Zaini SN, Mohamed Affandi FA, Mohandas C, Mohd R, Mohd Fauzi NA, Mohd Sharif NH, Mohd Yusoff Y, Moist L, Moncada A, Montasser M, Moon A, Moran C, Morgan N, Moriarty J, Morig G, Morinaga H, Morino K, Morisaki T, Morishita Y, Morlok S, Morris A, Morris F, Mostafa S, Mostefai Y, Motegi M, Motherwell N, Motta D, Mottl A, Moys R, Mozaffari S, Muir J, Mulhern J, Mulligan S, Munakata Y, Murakami C, Murakoshi M, Murawska A, Murphy K, Murphy L, Murray S, Murtagh H, Musa MA, Mushahar L, Mustafa R, Mustafar R, Muto M, Nadar E, Nagano R, Nagasawa T, Nagashima E, Nagasu H, Nagelberg S, Nair H, Nakagawa Y, Nakahara M, Nakamura J, Nakamura R, Nakamura T, Nakaoka M, Nakashima E, Nakata J, Nakata M, Nakatani S, Nakatsuka A, Nakayama Y, Nakhoul G, Nangaku M, Naverrete G, Navivala A, Nazeer I, Negrea L, Nethaji C, Newman E, Ng SYA, Ng TJ, Ngu LLS, Nimbkar T, Nishi H, Nishi M, Nishi S, Nishida Y, Nishiyama A, Niu J, Niu P, Nobili G, Nohara N, Nojima I, Nolan J, Nosseir H, Nozawa M, Nunn M, Nunokawa S, Oda M, Oe M, Oe Y, Ogane K, Ogawa W, Ogihara T, Oguchi G, Ohsugi M, Oishi K, Okada Y, Okajyo J, Okamoto S, Okamura K, Olufuwa O, Oluyombo R, Omata A, Omori Y, Ong LM, Ong YC, Onyema J, Oomatia A, Oommen A, Oremus R, Orimo Y, Ortalda V, Osaki Y, Osawa Y, Osmond Foster J, O'Sullivan A, Otani T, Othman N, Otomo S, O'Toole J, Owen L, Ozawa T, Padiyar A, Page N, Pajak S, Paliege A, Pandey A, Pandey R, Pariani H, Park J, Parrigon M, Passauer J, Patecki M, Patel M, Patel R, Patel T, Patel Z, Paul R, Paul R, Paulsen L, Pavone L, Peixoto A, Peji J, Peng BC, Peng K, Pennino L, Pereira E, Perez E, Pergola P, Pesce F, Pessolano G, Petchey W, Petr EJ, Pfab T, Phelan P, Phillips R, Phillips T, Phipps M, Piccinni G, Pickett T, Pickworth S, Piemontese M, Pinto D, Piper J, Plummer-Morgan J, Poehler D, Polese L, Poma V, Pontremoli R, Postal A, Pötz C, Power A, Pradhan N, Pradhan R, Preiss D, Preiss E, Preston K, Prib N, Price L, Provenzano C, Pugay C, Pulido R, Putz F, Qiao Y, Quartagno R, Quashie-Akponeware M, Rabara R, Rabasa-Lhoret R, Radhakrishnan D, Radley M, Raff R, Raguwaran S, Rahbari-Oskoui F, Rahman M, Rahmat K, Ramadoss S, Ramanaidu S, Ramasamy S, Ramli R, Ramli S, Ramsey T, Rankin A, Rashidi A, Raymond L, Razali WAFA, Read K, Reiner H, Reisler A, Reith C, Renner J, Rettenmaier B, Richmond L, Rijos D, Rivera R, Rivers V, Robinson H, Rocco M, Rodriguez-Bachiller I, Rodriquez R, Roesch C, Roesch J, Rogers J, Rohnstock M, Rolfsmeier S, Roman M, Romo A, Rosati A, Rosenberg S, Ross T, Rossello X, Roura M, Roussel M, Rovner S, Roy S, Rucker S, Rump L, Ruocco M, Ruse S, Russo F, Russo M, Ryder M, Sabarai A, Saccà C, Sachson R, Sadler E, Safiee NS, Sahani M, Saillant A, Saini J, Saito C, Saito S, Sakaguchi K, Sakai M, Salim H, Salviani C, Sammons E, Sampson A, Samson F, Sandercock P, Sanguila S, Santorelli G, Santoro D, Sarabu N, Saram T, Sardell R, Sasajima H, Sasaki T, Satko S, Sato A, Sato D, Sato H, Sato H, Sato J, Sato T, Sato Y, Satoh M, Sawada K, Schanz M, Scheidemantel F, Schemmelmann M, Schettler E, Schettler V, Schlieper GR, Schmidt C, Schmidt G, Schmidt U, Schmidt-Gurtler H, Schmude M, Schneider A, Schneider I, Schneider-Danwitz C, Schomig M, Schramm T, Schreiber A, Schricker S, Schroppel B, Schulte-Kemna L, Schulz E, Schumacher B, Schuster A, Schwab A, Scolari F, Scott A, Seeger W, Seeger W, Segal M, Seifert L, Seifert M, Sekiya M, Sellars R, Seman MR, Shah S, Shah S, Shainberg L, Shanmuganathan M, Shao F, Sharma K, Sharpe C, Sheikh-Ali M, Sheldon J, Shenton C, Shepherd A, Shepperd M, Sheridan R, Sheriff Z, Shibata Y, Shigehara T, Shikata K, Shimamura K, Shimano H, Shimizu Y, Shimoda H, Shin K, Shivashankar G, Shojima N, Silva R, Sim CSB, Simmons K, Sinha S, Sitter T, Sivanandam S, Skipper M, Sloan K, Sloan L, Smith R, Smyth J, Sobande T, Sobata M, Somalanka S, Song X, Sonntag F, Sood B, Sor SY, Soufer J, Sparks H, Spatoliatore G, Spinola T, Squyres S, Srivastava A, Stanfield J, Staplin N, Staylor K, Steele A, Steen O, Steffl D, Stegbauer J, Stellbrink C, Stellbrink E, Stevens W, Stevenson A, Stewart-Ray V, Stickley J, Stoffler D, Stratmann B, Streitenberger S, Strutz F, Stubbs J, Stumpf J, Suazo N, Suchinda P, Suckling R, Sudin A, Sugamori K, Sugawara H, Sugawara K, Sugimoto D, Sugiyama H, Sugiyama H, Sugiyama T, Sullivan M, Sumi M, Suresh N, Sutton D, Suzuki H, Suzuki R, Suzuki Y, Suzuki Y, Suzuki Y, Swanson E, Swift P, Syed S, Szerlip H, Taal M, Taddeo M, Tailor C, Tajima K, Takagi M, Takahashi K, Takahashi K, Takahashi M, Takahashi T, Takahira E, Takai T, Takaoka M, Takeoka J, Takesada A, Takezawa M, Talbot M, Taliercio J, Talsania T, Tamori Y, Tamura R, Tamura Y, Tan CHH, Tan EZZ, Tanabe A, Tanabe K, Tanaka A, Tanaka A, Tanaka N, Tang S, Tang Z, Tanigaki K, Tarlac M, Tatsuzawa A, Tay JF, Tay LL, Taylor J, Taylor K, Taylor K, Te A, Tenbusch L, Teng KS, Terakawa A, Terry J, Tham ZD, Tholl S, Thomas G, Thong KM, Tietjen D, Timadjer A, Tindall H, Tipper S, Tobin K, Toda N, Tokuyama A, Tolibas M, Tomita A, Tomita T, Tomlinson J, Tonks L, Topf J, Topping S, Torp A, Torres A, Totaro F, Toth P, Toyonaga Y, Tripodi F, Trivedi K, Tropman E, Tschope D, Tse J, Tsuji K, Tsunekawa S, Tsunoda R, Tucky B, Tufail S, Tuffaha A, Turan E, Turner H, Turner J, Turner M, Tuttle KR, Tye YL, Tyler A, Tyler J, Uchi H, Uchida H, Uchida T, Uchida T, Udagawa T, Ueda S, Ueda Y, Ueki K, Ugni S, Ugwu E, Umeno R, Unekawa C, Uozumi K, Urquia K, Valleteau A, Valletta C, van Erp R, Vanhoy C, Varad V, Varma R, Varughese A, Vasquez P, Vasseur A, Veelken R, Velagapudi C, Verdel K, Vettoretti S, Vezzoli G, Vielhauer V, Viera R, Vilar E, Villaruel S, Vinall L, Vinathan J, Visnjic M, Voigt E, von-Eynatten M, Vourvou M, Wada J, Wada J, Wada T, Wada Y, Wakayama K, Wakita Y, Wallendszus K, Walters T, Wan Mohamad WH, Wang L, Wang W, Wang X, Wang X, Wang Y, Wanner C, Wanninayake S, Watada H, Watanabe K, Watanabe K, Watanabe M, Waterfall H, Watkins D, Watson S, Weaving L, Weber B, Webley Y, Webster A, Webster M, Weetman M, Wei W, Weihprecht H, Weiland L, Weinmann-Menke J, Weinreich T, Wendt R, Weng Y, Whalen M, Whalley G, Wheatley R, Wheeler A, Wheeler J, Whelton P, White K, Whitmore B, Whittaker S, Wiebel J, Wiley J, Wilkinson L, Willett M, Williams A, Williams E, Williams K, Williams T, Wilson A, Wilson P, Wincott L, Wines E, Winkelmann B, Winkler M, Winter-Goodwin B, Witczak J, Wittes J, Wittmann M, Wolf G, Wolf L, Wolfling R, Wong C, Wong E, Wong HS, Wong LW, Wong YH, Wonnacott A, Wood A, Wood L, Woodhouse H, Wooding N, Woodman A, Wren K, Wu J, Wu P, Xia S, Xiao H, Xiao X, Xie Y, Xu C, Xu Y, Xue H, Yahaya H, Yalamanchili H, Yamada A, Yamada N, Yamagata K, Yamaguchi M, Yamaji Y, Yamamoto A, Yamamoto S, Yamamoto S, Yamamoto T, Yamanaka A, Yamano T, Yamanouchi Y, Yamasaki N, Yamasaki Y, Yamasaki Y, Yamashita C, Yamauchi T, Yan Q, Yanagisawa E, Yang F, Yang L, Yano S, Yao S, Yao Y, Yarlagadda S, Yasuda Y, Yiu V, Yokoyama T, Yoshida S, Yoshidome E, Yoshikawa H, Young A, Young T, Yousif V, Yu H, Yu Y, Yuasa K, Yusof N, Zalunardo N, Zander B, Zani R, Zappulo F, Zayed M, Zemann B, Zettergren P, Zhang H, Zhang L, Zhang L, Zhang N, Zhang X, Zhao J, Zhao L, Zhao S, Zhao Z, Zhong H, Zhou N, Zhou S, Zhu D, Zhu L, Zhu S, Zietz M, Zippo M, Zirino F, Zulkipli FH. Effects of empagliflozin on progression of chronic kidney disease: a prespecified secondary analysis from the empa-kidney trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2024; 12:39-50. [PMID: 38061371 PMCID: PMC7615591 DOI: 10.1016/s2213-8587(23)00321-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2023] [Revised: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce progression of chronic kidney disease and the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in a wide range of patients. However, their effects on kidney disease progression in some patients with chronic kidney disease are unclear because few clinical kidney outcomes occurred among such patients in the completed trials. In particular, some guidelines stratify their level of recommendation about who should be treated with SGLT2 inhibitors based on diabetes status and albuminuria. We aimed to assess the effects of empagliflozin on progression of chronic kidney disease both overall and among specific types of participants in the EMPA-KIDNEY trial. METHODS EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA), and included individuals aged 18 years or older with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or with an eGFR of 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher. We explored the effects of 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily versus placebo on the annualised rate of change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR slope), a tertiary outcome. We studied the acute slope (from randomisation to 2 months) and chronic slope (from 2 months onwards) separately, using shared parameter models to estimate the latter. Analyses were done in all randomly assigned participants by intention to treat. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. FINDINGS Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and then followed up for a median of 2·0 years (IQR 1·5-2·4). Prespecified subgroups of eGFR included 2282 (34·5%) participants with an eGFR of less than 30 mL/min per 1·73 m2, 2928 (44·3%) with an eGFR of 30 to less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, and 1399 (21·2%) with an eGFR 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or higher. Prespecified subgroups of uACR included 1328 (20·1%) with a uACR of less than 30 mg/g, 1864 (28·2%) with a uACR of 30 to 300 mg/g, and 3417 (51·7%) with a uACR of more than 300 mg/g. Overall, allocation to empagliflozin caused an acute 2·12 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (95% CI 1·83-2·41) reduction in eGFR, equivalent to a 6% (5-6) dip in the first 2 months. After this, it halved the chronic slope from -2·75 to -1·37 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (relative difference 50%, 95% CI 42-58). The absolute and relative benefits of empagliflozin on the magnitude of the chronic slope varied significantly depending on diabetes status and baseline levels of eGFR and uACR. In particular, the absolute difference in chronic slopes was lower in patients with lower baseline uACR, but because this group progressed more slowly than those with higher uACR, this translated to a larger relative difference in chronic slopes in this group (86% [36-136] reduction in the chronic slope among those with baseline uACR <30 mg/g compared with a 29% [19-38] reduction for those with baseline uACR ≥2000 mg/g; ptrend<0·0001). INTERPRETATION Empagliflozin slowed the rate of progression of chronic kidney disease among all types of participant in the EMPA-KIDNEY trial, including those with little albuminuria. Albuminuria alone should not be used to determine whether to treat with an SGLT2 inhibitor. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly.
Collapse
|
2
|
Judge PK, Staplin N, Mayne KJ, Wanner C, Green JB, Hauske SJ, Emberson JR, Preiss D, Ng SYA, Roddick AJ, Sammons E, Zhu D, Hill M, Stevens W, Wallendszus K, Brenner S, Cheung AK, Liu ZH, Li J, Hooi LS, Liu WJ, Kadowaki T, Nangaku M, Levin A, Cherney D, Maggioni AP, Pontremoli R, Deo R, Goto S, Rossello X, Tuttle KR, Steubl D, Massey D, Landray MJ, Baigent C, Haynes R, Herrington WG, Abat S, Abd Rahman R, Abdul Cader R, Abdul Hafidz MI, Abdul Wahab MZ, Abdullah NK, Abdul-Samad T, Abe M, Abraham N, Acheampong S, Achiri P, Acosta JA, Adeleke A, Adell V, Adewuyi-Dalton R, Adnan N, Africano A, Agharazii M, Aguilar F, Aguilera A, Ahmad M, Ahmad MK, Ahmad NA, Ahmad NH, Ahmad NI, Ahmad Miswan N, Ahmad Rosdi H, Ahmed I, Ahmed S, Ahmed S, Aiello J, Aitken A, AitSadi R, Aker S, Akimoto S, Akinfolarin A, Akram S, Alberici F, Albert C, Aldrich L, Alegata M, Alexander L, Alfaress S, Alhadj Ali M, Ali A, Ali A, Alicic R, Aliu A, Almaraz R, Almasarwah R, Almeida J, Aloisi A, Al-Rabadi L, Alscher D, Alvarez P, Al-Zeer B, Amat M, Ambrose C, Ammar H, An Y, Andriaccio L, Ansu K, Apostolidi A, Arai N, Araki H, Araki S, Arbi A, Arechiga O, Armstrong S, Arnold T, Aronoff S, Arriaga W, Arroyo J, Arteaga D, Asahara S, Asai A, Asai N, Asano S, Asawa M, Asmee MF, Aucella F, Augustin M, Avery A, Awad A, Awang IY, Awazawa M, Axler A, Ayub W, Azhari Z, Baccaro R, Badin C, Bagwell B, Bahlmann-Kroll E, Bahtar AZ, Baigent C, Bains D, Bajaj H, Baker R, Baldini E, Banas B, Banerjee D, Banno S, Bansal S, Barberi S, Barnes S, Barnini C, Barot C, Barrett K, Barrios R, Bartolomei Mecatti B, Barton I, Barton J, Basily W, Bavanandan S, Baxter A, Becker L, Beddhu S, Beige J, Beigh S, Bell S, Benck U, Beneat A, Bennett A, Bennett D, Benyon S, Berdeprado J, Bergler T, Bergner A, Berry M, Bevilacqua M, Bhairoo J, Bhandari S, Bhandary N, Bhatt A, Bhattarai M, Bhavsar M, Bian W, Bianchini F, Bianco S, Bilous R, Bilton J, Bilucaglia D, Bird C, Birudaraju D, Biscoveanu M, Blake C, Bleakley N, Bocchicchia K, Bodine S, Bodington R, Boedecker S, Bolduc M, Bolton S, Bond C, Boreky F, Boren K, Bouchi R, Bough L, Bovan D, Bowler C, Bowman L, Brar N, Braun C, Breach A, Breitenfeldt M, Brenner S, Brettschneider B, Brewer A, Brewer G, Brindle V, Brioni E, Brown C, Brown H, Brown L, Brown R, Brown S, Browne D, Bruce K, Brueckmann M, Brunskill N, Bryant M, Brzoska M, Bu Y, Buckman C, Budoff M, Bullen M, Burke A, Burnette S, Burston C, Busch M, Bushnell J, Butler S, Büttner C, Byrne C, Caamano A, Cadorna J, Cafiero C, Cagle M, Cai J, Calabrese K, Calvi C, Camilleri B, Camp S, Campbell D, Campbell R, Cao H, Capelli I, Caple M, Caplin B, Cardone A, Carle J, Carnall V, Caroppo M, Carr S, Carraro G, Carson M, Casares P, Castillo C, Castro C, Caudill B, Cejka V, Ceseri M, Cham L, Chamberlain A, Chambers J, Chan CBT, Chan JYM, Chan YC, Chang E, Chang E, Chant T, Chavagnon T, Chellamuthu P, Chen F, Chen J, Chen P, Chen TM, Chen Y, Chen Y, Cheng C, Cheng H, Cheng MC, Cherney D, Cheung AK, Ching CH, Chitalia N, Choksi R, Chukwu C, Chung K, Cianciolo G, Cipressa L, Clark S, Clarke H, Clarke R, Clarke S, Cleveland B, Cole E, Coles H, Condurache L, Connor A, Convery K, Cooper A, Cooper N, Cooper Z, Cooperman L, Cosgrove L, Coutts P, Cowley A, Craik R, Cui G, Cummins T, Dahl N, Dai H, Dajani L, D'Amelio A, Damian E, Damianik K, Danel L, Daniels C, Daniels T, Darbeau S, Darius H, Dasgupta T, Davies J, Davies L, Davis A, Davis J, Davis L, Dayanandan R, Dayi S, Dayrell R, De Nicola L, Debnath S, Deeb W, Degenhardt S, DeGoursey K, Delaney M, Deo R, DeRaad R, Derebail V, Dev D, Devaux M, Dhall P, Dhillon G, Dienes J, Dobre M, Doctolero E, Dodds V, Domingo D, Donaldson D, Donaldson P, Donhauser C, Donley V, Dorestin S, Dorey S, Doulton T, Draganova D, Draxlbauer K, Driver F, Du H, Dube F, Duck T, Dugal T, Dugas J, Dukka H, Dumann H, Durham W, Dursch M, Dykas R, Easow R, Eckrich E, Eden G, Edmerson E, Edwards H, Ee LW, Eguchi J, Ehrl Y, Eichstadt K, Eid W, Eilerman B, Ejima Y, Eldon H, Ellam T, Elliott L, Ellison R, Emberson J, Epp R, Er A, Espino-Obrero M, Estcourt S, Estienne L, Evans G, Evans J, Evans S, Fabbri G, Fajardo-Moser M, Falcone C, Fani F, Faria-Shayler P, Farnia F, Farrugia D, Fechter M, Fellowes D, Feng F, Fernandez J, Ferraro P, Field A, Fikry S, Finch J, Finn H, Fioretto P, Fish R, Fleischer A, Fleming-Brown D, Fletcher L, Flora R, Foellinger C, Foligno N, Forest S, Forghani Z, Forsyth K, Fottrell-Gould D, Fox P, Frankel A, Fraser D, Frazier R, Frederick K, Freking N, French H, Froment A, Fuchs B, Fuessl L, Fujii H, Fujimoto A, Fujita A, Fujita K, Fujita Y, Fukagawa M, Fukao Y, Fukasawa A, Fuller T, Funayama T, Fung E, Furukawa M, Furukawa Y, Furusho M, Gabel S, Gaidu J, Gaiser S, Gallo K, Galloway C, Gambaro G, Gan CC, Gangemi C, Gao M, Garcia K, Garcia M, Garofalo C, Garrity M, Garza A, Gasko S, Gavrila M, Gebeyehu B, Geddes A, Gentile G, George A, George J, Gesualdo L, Ghalli F, Ghanem A, Ghate T, Ghavampour S, Ghazi A, Gherman A, Giebeln-Hudnell U, Gill B, Gillham S, Girakossyan I, Girndt M, Giuffrida A, Glenwright M, Glider T, Gloria R, Glowski D, Goh BL, Goh CB, Gohda T, Goldenberg R, Goldfaden R, Goldsmith C, Golson B, Gonce V, Gong Q, Goodenough B, Goodwin N, Goonasekera M, Gordon A, Gordon J, Gore A, Goto H, Goto S, Goto S, Gowen D, Grace A, Graham J, Grandaliano G, Gray M, Green JB, Greene T, Greenwood G, Grewal B, Grifa R, Griffin D, Griffin S, Grimmer P, Grobovaite E, Grotjahn S, Guerini A, Guest C, Gunda S, Guo B, Guo Q, Haack S, Haase M, Haaser K, Habuki K, Hadley A, Hagan S, Hagge S, Haller H, Ham S, Hamal S, Hamamoto Y, Hamano N, Hamm M, Hanburry A, Haneda M, Hanf C, Hanif W, Hansen J, Hanson L, Hantel S, Haraguchi T, Harding E, Harding T, Hardy C, Hartner C, Harun Z, Harvill L, Hasan A, Hase H, Hasegawa F, Hasegawa T, Hashimoto A, Hashimoto C, Hashimoto M, Hashimoto S, Haskett S, Hauske SJ, Hawfield A, Hayami T, Hayashi M, Hayashi S, Haynes R, Hazara A, Healy C, Hecktman J, Heine G, Henderson H, Henschel R, Hepditch A, Herfurth K, Hernandez G, Hernandez Pena A, Hernandez-Cassis C, Herrington WG, Herzog C, Hewins S, Hewitt D, Hichkad L, Higashi S, Higuchi C, Hill C, Hill L, Hill M, Himeno T, Hing A, Hirakawa Y, Hirata K, Hirota Y, Hisatake T, Hitchcock S, Hodakowski A, Hodge W, Hogan R, Hohenstatt U, Hohenstein B, Hooi L, Hope S, Hopley M, Horikawa S, Hosein D, Hosooka T, Hou L, Hou W, Howie L, Howson A, Hozak M, Htet Z, Hu X, Hu Y, Huang J, Huda N, Hudig L, Hudson A, Hugo C, Hull R, Hume L, Hundei W, Hunt N, Hunter A, Hurley S, Hurst A, Hutchinson C, Hyo T, Ibrahim FH, Ibrahim S, Ihana N, Ikeda T, Imai A, Imamine R, Inamori A, Inazawa H, Ingell J, Inomata K, Inukai Y, Ioka M, Irtiza-Ali A, Isakova T, Isari W, Iselt M, Ishiguro A, Ishihara K, Ishikawa T, Ishimoto T, Ishizuka K, Ismail R, Itano S, Ito H, Ito K, Ito M, Ito Y, Iwagaitsu S, Iwaita Y, Iwakura T, Iwamoto M, Iwasa M, Iwasaki H, Iwasaki S, Izumi K, Izumi K, Izumi T, Jaafar SM, Jackson C, Jackson Y, Jafari G, Jahangiriesmaili M, Jain N, Jansson K, Jasim H, Jeffers L, Jenkins A, Jesky M, Jesus-Silva J, Jeyarajah D, Jiang Y, Jiao X, Jimenez G, Jin B, Jin Q, Jochims J, Johns B, Johnson C, Johnson T, Jolly S, Jones L, Jones L, Jones S, Jones T, Jones V, Joseph M, Joshi S, Judge P, Junejo N, Junus S, Kachele M, Kadowaki T, Kadoya H, Kaga H, Kai H, Kajio H, Kaluza-Schilling W, Kamaruzaman L, Kamarzarian A, Kamimura Y, Kamiya H, Kamundi C, Kan T, Kanaguchi Y, Kanazawa A, Kanda E, Kanegae S, Kaneko K, Kaneko K, Kang HY, Kano T, Karim M, Karounos D, Karsan W, Kasagi R, Kashihara N, Katagiri H, Katanosaka A, Katayama A, Katayama M, Katiman E, Kato K, Kato M, Kato N, Kato S, Kato T, Kato Y, Katsuda Y, Katsuno T, Kaufeld J, Kavak Y, Kawai I, Kawai M, Kawai M, Kawase A, Kawashima S, Kazory A, Kearney J, Keith B, Kellett J, Kelley S, Kershaw M, Ketteler M, Khai Q, Khairullah Q, Khandwala H, Khoo KKL, Khwaja A, Kidokoro K, Kielstein J, Kihara M, Kimber C, Kimura S, Kinashi H, Kingston H, Kinomura M, Kinsella-Perks E, Kitagawa M, Kitajima M, Kitamura S, Kiyosue A, Kiyota M, Klauser F, Klausmann G, Kmietschak W, Knapp K, Knight C, Knoppe A, Knott C, Kobayashi M, Kobayashi R, Kobayashi T, Koch M, Kodama S, Kodani N, Kogure E, Koizumi M, Kojima H, Kojo T, Kolhe N, Komaba H, Komiya T, Komori H, Kon SP, Kondo M, Kondo M, Kong W, Konishi M, Kono K, Koshino M, Kosugi T, Kothapalli B, Kozlowski T, Kraemer B, Kraemer-Guth A, Krappe J, Kraus D, Kriatselis C, Krieger C, Krish P, Kruger B, Ku Md Razi KR, Kuan Y, Kubota S, Kuhn S, Kumar P, Kume S, Kummer I, Kumuji R, Küpper A, Kuramae T, Kurian L, Kuribayashi C, Kurien R, Kuroda E, Kurose T, Kutschat A, Kuwabara N, Kuwata H, La Manna G, Lacey M, Lafferty K, LaFleur P, Lai V, Laity E, Lambert A, Landray MJ, Langlois M, Latif F, Latore E, Laundy E, Laurienti D, Lawson A, Lay M, Leal I, Leal I, Lee AK, Lee J, Lee KQ, Lee R, Lee SA, Lee YY, Lee-Barkey Y, Leonard N, Leoncini G, Leong CM, Lerario S, Leslie A, Levin A, Lewington A, Li J, Li N, Li X, Li Y, Liberti L, Liberti ME, Liew A, Liew YF, Lilavivat U, Lim SK, Lim YS, Limon E, Lin H, Lioudaki E, Liu H, Liu J, Liu L, Liu Q, Liu WJ, Liu X, Liu Z, Loader D, Lochhead H, Loh CL, Lorimer A, Loudermilk L, Loutan J, Low CK, Low CL, Low YM, Lozon Z, Lu Y, Lucci D, Ludwig U, Luker N, Lund D, Lustig R, Lyle S, Macdonald C, MacDougall I, Machicado R, MacLean D, Macleod P, Madera A, Madore F, Maeda K, Maegawa H, Maeno S, Mafham M, Magee J, Maggioni AP, Mah DY, Mahabadi V, Maiguma M, Makita Y, Makos G, Manco L, Mangiacapra R, Manley J, Mann P, Mano S, Marcotte G, Maris J, Mark P, Markau S, Markovic M, Marshall C, Martin M, Martinez C, Martinez S, Martins G, Maruyama K, Maruyama S, Marx K, Maselli A, Masengu A, Maskill A, Masumoto S, Masutani K, Matsumoto M, Matsunaga T, Matsuoka N, Matsushita M, Matthews M, Matthias S, Matvienko E, Maurer M, Maxwell P, Mayne KJ, Mazlan N, Mazlan SA, Mbuyisa A, McCafferty K, McCarroll F, McCarthy T, McClary-Wright C, McCray K, McDermott P, McDonald C, McDougall R, McHaffie E, McIntosh K, McKinley T, McLaughlin S, McLean N, McNeil L, Measor A, Meek J, Mehta A, Mehta R, Melandri M, Mené P, Meng T, Menne J, Merritt K, Merscher S, Meshykhi C, Messa P, Messinger L, Miftari N, Miller R, Miller Y, Miller-Hodges E, Minatoguchi M, Miners M, Minutolo R, Mita T, Miura Y, Miyaji M, Miyamoto S, Miyatsuka T, Miyazaki M, Miyazawa I, Mizumachi R, Mizuno M, Moffat S, Mohamad Nor FS, Mohamad Zaini SN, Mohamed Affandi FA, Mohandas C, Mohd R, Mohd Fauzi NA, Mohd Sharif NH, Mohd Yusoff Y, Moist L, Moncada A, Montasser M, Moon A, Moran C, Morgan N, Moriarty J, Morig G, Morinaga H, Morino K, Morisaki T, Morishita Y, Morlok S, Morris A, Morris F, Mostafa S, Mostefai Y, Motegi M, Motherwell N, Motta D, Mottl A, Moys R, Mozaffari S, Muir J, Mulhern J, Mulligan S, Munakata Y, Murakami C, Murakoshi M, Murawska A, Murphy K, Murphy L, Murray S, Murtagh H, Musa MA, Mushahar L, Mustafa R, Mustafar R, Muto M, Nadar E, Nagano R, Nagasawa T, Nagashima E, Nagasu H, Nagelberg S, Nair H, Nakagawa Y, Nakahara M, Nakamura J, Nakamura R, Nakamura T, Nakaoka M, Nakashima E, Nakata J, Nakata M, Nakatani S, Nakatsuka A, Nakayama Y, Nakhoul G, Nangaku M, Naverrete G, Navivala A, Nazeer I, Negrea L, Nethaji C, Newman E, Ng SYA, Ng TJ, Ngu LLS, Nimbkar T, Nishi H, Nishi M, Nishi S, Nishida Y, Nishiyama A, Niu J, Niu P, Nobili G, Nohara N, Nojima I, Nolan J, Nosseir H, Nozawa M, Nunn M, Nunokawa S, Oda M, Oe M, Oe Y, Ogane K, Ogawa W, Ogihara T, Oguchi G, Ohsugi M, Oishi K, Okada Y, Okajyo J, Okamoto S, Okamura K, Olufuwa O, Oluyombo R, Omata A, Omori Y, Ong LM, Ong YC, Onyema J, Oomatia A, Oommen A, Oremus R, Orimo Y, Ortalda V, Osaki Y, Osawa Y, Osmond Foster J, O'Sullivan A, Otani T, Othman N, Otomo S, O'Toole J, Owen L, Ozawa T, Padiyar A, Page N, Pajak S, Paliege A, Pandey A, Pandey R, Pariani H, Park J, Parrigon M, Passauer J, Patecki M, Patel M, Patel R, Patel T, Patel Z, Paul R, Paul R, Paulsen L, Pavone L, Peixoto A, Peji J, Peng BC, Peng K, Pennino L, Pereira E, Perez E, Pergola P, Pesce F, Pessolano G, Petchey W, Petr EJ, Pfab T, Phelan P, Phillips R, Phillips T, Phipps M, Piccinni G, Pickett T, Pickworth S, Piemontese M, Pinto D, Piper J, Plummer-Morgan J, Poehler D, Polese L, Poma V, Pontremoli R, Postal A, Pötz C, Power A, Pradhan N, Pradhan R, Preiss D, Preiss E, Preston K, Prib N, Price L, Provenzano C, Pugay C, Pulido R, Putz F, Qiao Y, Quartagno R, Quashie-Akponeware M, Rabara R, Rabasa-Lhoret R, Radhakrishnan D, Radley M, Raff R, Raguwaran S, Rahbari-Oskoui F, Rahman M, Rahmat K, Ramadoss S, Ramanaidu S, Ramasamy S, Ramli R, Ramli S, Ramsey T, Rankin A, Rashidi A, Raymond L, Razali WAFA, Read K, Reiner H, Reisler A, Reith C, Renner J, Rettenmaier B, Richmond L, Rijos D, Rivera R, Rivers V, Robinson H, Rocco M, Rodriguez-Bachiller I, Rodriquez R, Roesch C, Roesch J, Rogers J, Rohnstock M, Rolfsmeier S, Roman M, Romo A, Rosati A, Rosenberg S, Ross T, Rossello X, Roura M, Roussel M, Rovner S, Roy S, Rucker S, Rump L, Ruocco M, Ruse S, Russo F, Russo M, Ryder M, Sabarai A, Saccà C, Sachson R, Sadler E, Safiee NS, Sahani M, Saillant A, Saini J, Saito C, Saito S, Sakaguchi K, Sakai M, Salim H, Salviani C, Sammons E, Sampson A, Samson F, Sandercock P, Sanguila S, Santorelli G, Santoro D, Sarabu N, Saram T, Sardell R, Sasajima H, Sasaki T, Satko S, Sato A, Sato D, Sato H, Sato H, Sato J, Sato T, Sato Y, Satoh M, Sawada K, Schanz M, Scheidemantel F, Schemmelmann M, Schettler E, Schettler V, Schlieper GR, Schmidt C, Schmidt G, Schmidt U, Schmidt-Gurtler H, Schmude M, Schneider A, Schneider I, Schneider-Danwitz C, Schomig M, Schramm T, Schreiber A, Schricker S, Schroppel B, Schulte-Kemna L, Schulz E, Schumacher B, Schuster A, Schwab A, Scolari F, Scott A, Seeger W, Seeger W, Segal M, Seifert L, Seifert M, Sekiya M, Sellars R, Seman MR, Shah S, Shah S, Shainberg L, Shanmuganathan M, Shao F, Sharma K, Sharpe C, Sheikh-Ali M, Sheldon J, Shenton C, Shepherd A, Shepperd M, Sheridan R, Sheriff Z, Shibata Y, Shigehara T, Shikata K, Shimamura K, Shimano H, Shimizu Y, Shimoda H, Shin K, Shivashankar G, Shojima N, Silva R, Sim CSB, Simmons K, Sinha S, Sitter T, Sivanandam S, Skipper M, Sloan K, Sloan L, Smith R, Smyth J, Sobande T, Sobata M, Somalanka S, Song X, Sonntag F, Sood B, Sor SY, Soufer J, Sparks H, Spatoliatore G, Spinola T, Squyres S, Srivastava A, Stanfield J, Staplin N, Staylor K, Steele A, Steen O, Steffl D, Stegbauer J, Stellbrink C, Stellbrink E, Stevens W, Stevenson A, Stewart-Ray V, Stickley J, Stoffler D, Stratmann B, Streitenberger S, Strutz F, Stubbs J, Stumpf J, Suazo N, Suchinda P, Suckling R, Sudin A, Sugamori K, Sugawara H, Sugawara K, Sugimoto D, Sugiyama H, Sugiyama H, Sugiyama T, Sullivan M, Sumi M, Suresh N, Sutton D, Suzuki H, Suzuki R, Suzuki Y, Suzuki Y, Suzuki Y, Swanson E, Swift P, Syed S, Szerlip H, Taal M, Taddeo M, Tailor C, Tajima K, Takagi M, Takahashi K, Takahashi K, Takahashi M, Takahashi T, Takahira E, Takai T, Takaoka M, Takeoka J, Takesada A, Takezawa M, Talbot M, Taliercio J, Talsania T, Tamori Y, Tamura R, Tamura Y, Tan CHH, Tan EZZ, Tanabe A, Tanabe K, Tanaka A, Tanaka A, Tanaka N, Tang S, Tang Z, Tanigaki K, Tarlac M, Tatsuzawa A, Tay JF, Tay LL, Taylor J, Taylor K, Taylor K, Te A, Tenbusch L, Teng KS, Terakawa A, Terry J, Tham ZD, Tholl S, Thomas G, Thong KM, Tietjen D, Timadjer A, Tindall H, Tipper S, Tobin K, Toda N, Tokuyama A, Tolibas M, Tomita A, Tomita T, Tomlinson J, Tonks L, Topf J, Topping S, Torp A, Torres A, Totaro F, Toth P, Toyonaga Y, Tripodi F, Trivedi K, Tropman E, Tschope D, Tse J, Tsuji K, Tsunekawa S, Tsunoda R, Tucky B, Tufail S, Tuffaha A, Turan E, Turner H, Turner J, Turner M, Tuttle KR, Tye YL, Tyler A, Tyler J, Uchi H, Uchida H, Uchida T, Uchida T, Udagawa T, Ueda S, Ueda Y, Ueki K, Ugni S, Ugwu E, Umeno R, Unekawa C, Uozumi K, Urquia K, Valleteau A, Valletta C, van Erp R, Vanhoy C, Varad V, Varma R, Varughese A, Vasquez P, Vasseur A, Veelken R, Velagapudi C, Verdel K, Vettoretti S, Vezzoli G, Vielhauer V, Viera R, Vilar E, Villaruel S, Vinall L, Vinathan J, Visnjic M, Voigt E, von-Eynatten M, Vourvou M, Wada J, Wada J, Wada T, Wada Y, Wakayama K, Wakita Y, Wallendszus K, Walters T, Wan Mohamad WH, Wang L, Wang W, Wang X, Wang X, Wang Y, Wanner C, Wanninayake S, Watada H, Watanabe K, Watanabe K, Watanabe M, Waterfall H, Watkins D, Watson S, Weaving L, Weber B, Webley Y, Webster A, Webster M, Weetman M, Wei W, Weihprecht H, Weiland L, Weinmann-Menke J, Weinreich T, Wendt R, Weng Y, Whalen M, Whalley G, Wheatley R, Wheeler A, Wheeler J, Whelton P, White K, Whitmore B, Whittaker S, Wiebel J, Wiley J, Wilkinson L, Willett M, Williams A, Williams E, Williams K, Williams T, Wilson A, Wilson P, Wincott L, Wines E, Winkelmann B, Winkler M, Winter-Goodwin B, Witczak J, Wittes J, Wittmann M, Wolf G, Wolf L, Wolfling R, Wong C, Wong E, Wong HS, Wong LW, Wong YH, Wonnacott A, Wood A, Wood L, Woodhouse H, Wooding N, Woodman A, Wren K, Wu J, Wu P, Xia S, Xiao H, Xiao X, Xie Y, Xu C, Xu Y, Xue H, Yahaya H, Yalamanchili H, Yamada A, Yamada N, Yamagata K, Yamaguchi M, Yamaji Y, Yamamoto A, Yamamoto S, Yamamoto S, Yamamoto T, Yamanaka A, Yamano T, Yamanouchi Y, Yamasaki N, Yamasaki Y, Yamasaki Y, Yamashita C, Yamauchi T, Yan Q, Yanagisawa E, Yang F, Yang L, Yano S, Yao S, Yao Y, Yarlagadda S, Yasuda Y, Yiu V, Yokoyama T, Yoshida S, Yoshidome E, Yoshikawa H, Young A, Young T, Yousif V, Yu H, Yu Y, Yuasa K, Yusof N, Zalunardo N, Zander B, Zani R, Zappulo F, Zayed M, Zemann B, Zettergren P, Zhang H, Zhang L, Zhang L, Zhang N, Zhang X, Zhao J, Zhao L, Zhao S, Zhao Z, Zhong H, Zhou N, Zhou S, Zhu D, Zhu L, Zhu S, Zietz M, Zippo M, Zirino F, Zulkipli FH. Impact of primary kidney disease on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease: secondary analyses of the EMPA-KIDNEY trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2024; 12:51-60. [PMID: 38061372 DOI: 10.1016/s2213-8587(23)00322-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2023] [Revised: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The EMPA-KIDNEY trial showed that empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death in patients with chronic kidney disease mainly through slowing progression. We aimed to assess how effects of empagliflozin might differ by primary kidney disease across its broad population. METHODS EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA). Patients were eligible if their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher at screening. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily or matching placebo. Effects on kidney disease progression (defined as a sustained ≥40% eGFR decline from randomisation, end-stage kidney disease, a sustained eGFR below 10 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or death from kidney failure) were assessed using prespecified Cox models, and eGFR slope analyses used shared parameter models. Subgroup comparisons were performed by including relevant interaction terms in models. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. FINDINGS Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and followed up for a median of 2·0 years (IQR 1·5-2·4). Prespecified subgroupings by primary kidney disease included 2057 (31·1%) participants with diabetic kidney disease, 1669 (25·3%) with glomerular disease, 1445 (21·9%) with hypertensive or renovascular disease, and 1438 (21·8%) with other or unknown causes. Kidney disease progression occurred in 384 (11·6%) of 3304 patients in the empagliflozin group and 504 (15·2%) of 3305 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·71 [95% CI 0·62-0·81]), with no evidence that the relative effect size varied significantly by primary kidney disease (pheterogeneity=0·62). The between-group difference in chronic eGFR slopes (ie, from 2 months to final follow-up) was 1·37 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (95% CI 1·16-1·59), representing a 50% (42-58) reduction in the rate of chronic eGFR decline. This relative effect of empagliflozin on chronic eGFR slope was similar in analyses by different primary kidney diseases, including in explorations by type of glomerular disease and diabetes (p values for heterogeneity all >0·1). INTERPRETATION In a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease at risk of progression, including a wide range of non-diabetic causes of chronic kidney disease, empagliflozin reduced risk of kidney disease progression. Relative effect sizes were broadly similar irrespective of the cause of primary kidney disease, suggesting that SGLT2 inhibitors should be part of a standard of care to minimise risk of kidney failure in chronic kidney disease. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and UK Medical Research Council.
Collapse
|
3
|
Asano S, Asaoka R, Oishi A, Fujino Y, Murata H, Azuma K, Miyata M, Obata R, Inoue T. Investigating the clinical validity of the guided progression analysis definition with 10-2 visual field in retinitis pigmentosa. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0291208. [PMID: 37682905 PMCID: PMC10490847 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291208] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/23/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the clinical validity of the Guided Progression Analysis definition (GPAD) and cluster-based definition (CBD) with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 10-2 test in retinitis pigmentosa (RP). METHODS Ten non-progressive RP visual fields (VFs) (HFA 10-2 test) were simulated for each of 10 VFs of 111 eyes (10 simulations × 10 VF sequencies × 111 eyes = 111,000 VFs; Dataset 1). Using these simulated VFs, the specificity of GPAD for the detection of progression was determined. Using this dataset, similar analyses were conducted for the CBD, in which the HFA 10-2 test was divided into four quadrants. Subsequently, the Hybrid Definition was designed by combining the GPAD and CBD; various conditions of the GPAD and CBD were altered to approach a specificity of 95.0%. Subsequently, actual HFA 10-2 tests of 116 RP eyes (10 VFs each) were collected (Dataset 2), and true positive rate, true negative rate, false positive rate, and the time required to detect VF progression were evaluated and compared across the GPAD, CBD, and Hybrid Definition. RESULTS Specificity values were 95.4% and 98.5% for GPAD and CBD, respectively. There were no significant differences in true positive rate, true negative rate, and false positive rate between the GPAD, CBD, and Hybrid Definition. The GPAD and Hybrid Definition detected progression significantly earlier than the CBD (at 4.5, 5.0, and 4.5 years, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The GPAD and the optimized Hybrid Definition exhibited similar ability for the detection of progression, with the specificity reaching 95.4%.
Collapse
|
4
|
Asano S, Inoue T, Kure K, Kitano M, Fujita A, Nagahara M, Asaoka R, Obata R. Investigating the factors affecting myopia in retinopathy of prematurity after laser treatment. Int J Retina Vitreous 2023; 9:27. [PMID: 37046346 PMCID: PMC10091611 DOI: 10.1186/s40942-023-00456-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Accepted: 03/20/2023] [Indexed: 04/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We investigated the effect of the number of laser shots applied on the myopic variables to elucidate the mechanism of myopia development in laser-treated retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) eyes. METHODS A total of 33 eyes of 17 infants with ROP who underwent laser treatment were included in the analysis. Cycloplegic retinoscopic refraction testing was carried out and the spherical equivalent (SE) was calculated. Relationships between SE and various variables (including the number of laser shots applied) were examined. In addition, an age-matched control group without ROP was prepared and ocular structural parameters were compared. RESULTS Although there was no statistical difference in axial length (AL) between two groups (p = 0.88), SE was significantly more myopic in the ROP group (p < 0.001). SE was associated with AL, corneal refraction (CR), and crystalline lens power (CLP) in the ROP group. Of these three factors (AL, CR, and CLP), CLP and the number of laser shots applied were significantly correlated (p = 0.003); however, no correlations were observed between the number of laser shots and AL or CR (p = 0.15 and 0.10, respectively). Very similar tendency was observed in the analysis of the difference between right and left eyes in each child. CONCLUSIONS In laser-treated ROP eyes, AL, CR, and CLP were related to the degree of myopia. Moreover, the number of shots applied also affected the myopic status in laser-treated ROP eyes. Among AL, CR, and CLP, only CLP was correlated with the laser shots applied.
Collapse
|
5
|
Abe Y, Nakao A, Arikawa Y, Morace A, Mori T, Lan Z, Wei T, Asano S, Minami T, Kuramitsu Y, Habara H, Shiraga H, Fujioka S, Nakai M, Yogo A. Predictive capability of material screening by fast neutron activation analysis using laser-driven neutron sources. THE REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS 2022; 93:093523. [PMID: 36182514 DOI: 10.1063/5.0099217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2022] [Accepted: 08/22/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Bright, short-pulsed neutron beams from laser-driven neutron sources (LANSs) provide a new perspective on material screening via fast neutron activation analysis (FNAA). FNAA is a nondestructive technique for determining material elemental composition based on nuclear excitation by fast neutron bombardment and subsequent spectral analysis of prompt γ-rays emitted by the active nuclei. Our recent experiments and simulations have shown that activation analysis can be used in practice with modest neutron fluences on the order of 105 n/cm2, which is available with current laser technology. In addition, time-resolved γ-ray measurements combined with picosecond neutron probes from LANSs are effective in mitigating the issue of spectral interference between elements, enabling highly accurate screening of complex samples containing many elements. This paper describes the predictive capability of LANS-based activation analysis based on experimental demonstrations and spectral calculations with Monte Carlo simulations.
Collapse
|
6
|
Asahi R, Nakamura Y, Kanai M, Watanabe K, Yuguchi S, Kamo T, Azami M, Ogihara H, Asano S. Association with sagittal alignment and osteoporosis-related fractures in outpatient women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2022; 33:1275-1284. [PMID: 35091788 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-06282-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2021] [Accepted: 12/21/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED The baseline sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and pelvic tilt (PT) are independent risk factors of osteoporosis-related fractures in women with osteoporosis. We clarified the SVA and PT to predict the incidence of osteoporosis-related fractures. PURPOSE Sagittal alignment with osteoporosis women deteriorates with advancing age and sagittal alignment may indicate osteoporosis-related fractures in the future. However, whether the sagittal alignment predicts future osteoporosis-related fracture in patients with osteoporosis has not been clarified. We aimed to investigate the association between sagittal alignment and future osteoporosis-related fractures. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study. Of the 313 participants (mean follow-up period, 2.9 years), 236 were included in the analysis. At baseline, we measured bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine and the femoral neck, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic kyphosis, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic tilt (PT), geriatric locomotive function scale (GLFS), two-step value, and stand-up test. The information on medications and the duration of treatment were reviewed from the medical records. Additionally, participants reported their history of falls at baseline. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association of future osteoporosis-related fracture, and adjusted Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with all predictors as covariates. All continuous variables were calculated using standardized OR (sOR). RESULTS Osteoporosis-related fractures occurred in 33 of 313 participants (10.5%). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that a history of falls (OR =4.092, 95% CI: 1.029-16.265, p =0.045), SVA (sOR =4.228, 95% CI: 2.118-8.439, p <0.001), and PT (sOR =2.497, 95% CI: 1.087-5.733, p =0.031) were independent risk factors for future osteoporosis-related fractures. CONCLUSIONS This study revealed the SVA and PT to predict osteoporosis-related fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION UMIN000036516 (April 1, 2019).
Collapse
|
7
|
Abe K, Miyai T, Toyono T, Aixinjueluo W, Inoue T, Asano S, Ishii H, Yoshida J, Shirakawa R, Usui T. Comparison of efficacy and safety of accelerated trans-epithelial crosslinking for keratoconus patients with corneas thicker and thinner than 380µm. Curr Eye Res 2021; 47:511-516. [PMID: 34898348 DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2021.2018466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Accelerated trans-epithelial cross-linking (ATE-CXL), a therapy to halt keratoconus progression, has the merit of widening the indications for thinner corneas (<380 μm). Since a hypotonic solution affects the swollen cornea, corneas of <380 μm thickness at preoperative measurement can be an indication for ATE-CXL. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ATE-CXL for keratoconus between corneas with thicknesses <380 μm and ≥380 μm. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty-four eyes of 27 patients who underwent ATE-CXL (30 mW/cm2; 3 minutes) with completion of a 24-month follow-up, were enrolled and divided into two groups: Group 1, thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), <380 μm (n = 10) and Group 2, TCT, ≥380 μm (n = 24). A hypotonic solution was administered to Group 1 until the corneal thickness increased by >380 μm before UV-A irradiation. We measured uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), maximum and average keratometric values (Kmax and AveK), central corneal thickness (CCT), TCT by anterior segment optical coherence tomography, and corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) using specular microscopy. The changes from baseline to 24 months postoperatively between the two groups were compared accordingly. RESULTS The changes in Kmax and AveK from baseline to 24 months in Group 1 (ΔKmax: -7.8±7.7 D, ΔAveK: -4.3±6.1 D) showed significant decreases compared to those in Group 2 (ΔKmax: 0.2±3.0 D, ΔAveK: 0.6±2.7 D) (p = 0.004 and p = 0.001), and there were no significant changes from baseline to 24 months postoperatively in UCVA, BCVA, CCT, TCT, and ECD in both groups. CONCLUSION ATE-CXL is effective and safe for keratoconic corneas in both groups. The effect of reducing keratometric values was greater in the group with thinner corneas.
Collapse
|
8
|
Asano S, Oishi A, Asaoka R, Fujino Y, Murata H, Azuma K, Miyata M, Obata R, Inoue T. Detecting Progression of Retinitis Pigmentosa Using the Binomial Pointwise Linear Regression Method. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2021; 10:15. [PMID: 34757391 PMCID: PMC8590177 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.10.13.15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose A method of evaluating central visual field (VF) progression in eyes with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) has still to be established. We previously reported the potential merit of applying a binomial test to pointwise linear regression (binomial PLR) in glaucoma progression. In the current study, we investigated the usefulness of binomial PLR in eyes with RP. Methods A series of 10 VFs (VF 1–10, Humphrey field analyzer, 10-2 test) from 196 eyes of 103 patients with RP were collected retrospectively. The PLR was performed by regressing the total deviation of all test points with the complete series of 10 VFs. The accuracy (positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and false-positive rate) and the time required to detect VF progression with shorter VF series (from VF 1–5 to VF 1–9) were compared across the binomial PLR, a permutation analysis of PLR (PoPLR), and a mean deviation (MD) trend analysis. Results In evaluating VF progression, the binomial PLR was comparable with the PoPLR and MD trend analyses in its positive predictive value (0.55 to 0.95), negative predictive value (0.67 to 0.92), and false-positive rate (0.01 to 0.05). The binomial PLR required significantly less time to detect VF progression (5.0 ± 2.0 years) than the PoPLR and MD trend analyses (P < 0.01, P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions The application of a binomial PLR achieved reliable and earlier detection of central VF progression in eyes with RP. Translational Relevance A binomial PLR was useful in assessing VF progression in RP.
Collapse
|
9
|
Hashimoto Y, Kiwaki T, Sugiura H, Asano S, Murata H, Fujino Y, Matsuura M, Miki A, Mori K, Ikeda Y, Kanamoto T, Yamagami J, Inoue K, Tanito M, Yamanishi K, Asaoka R. Predicting 10-2 Visual Field From Optical Coherence Tomography in Glaucoma Using Deep Learning Corrected With 24-2/30-2 Visual Field. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2021; 10:28. [PMID: 34812893 PMCID: PMC8626848 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.10.13.28] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To investigate whether a correction based on a Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) 24-2/30-2 visual field (VF) can improve the prediction performance of a deep learning model to predict the HFA 10-2 VF test from macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) measurements. Methods This is a multicenter, cross-sectional study. The training dataset comprised 493 eyes of 285 subjects (407, open-angle glaucoma [OAG]; 86, normative) who underwent HFA 10-2 testing and macular OCT. The independent testing dataset comprised 104 OAG eyes of 82 subjects who had undergone HFA 10-2 test, HFA 24-2/30-2 test, and macular OCT. A convolutional neural network (CNN) DL model was trained to predict threshold sensitivity (TH) values in HFA 10-2 from retinal thickness measured by macular OCT. The predicted TH values was modified by pattern-based regularization (PBR) and corrected with HFA 24-2/30-2. Absolute error (AE) of mean TH values and mean absolute error (MAE) of TH values were compared between the CNN-PBR alone model and the CNN-PBR corrected with HFA 24-2/30-2. Results AE of mean TH values was lower in the CNN-PBR with HFA 24-2/30-2 correction than in the CNN-PBR alone (1.9dB vs. 2.6dB; P = 0.006). MAE of TH values was lower in the CNN-PBR with correction compared to the CNN-PBR alone (4.2dB vs. 5.3 dB; P < 0.001). The inferior temporal quadrant showed lower prediction errors compared with other quadrants. Conclusions The performance of a DL model to predict 10-2 VF from macular OCT was improved by the correction with HFA 24-2/30-2. Translational Relevance This model can reduce the burden of additional HFA 10-2 by making the best use of routinely performed HFA 24-2/30-2 and macular OCT.
Collapse
|
10
|
Asano S, Koh TCV, Aquino MC, Lim KAD, Sng CCA, Loon SC, Chew TKP. Comparison of refractive outcomes after combined cataract and glaucoma surgery: trabeculectomy and glaucoma drainage device implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2021; 47:1133-1138. [PMID: 34468450 DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2020] [Accepted: 01/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the refractive outcome of combined cataract surgery and glaucoma drainage device (GDD) implantation compared with trabeculectomy and cataract surgery. SETTING Department of Ophthalmology, National University Health System, Singapore. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. METHODS 206 eyes were enrolled for analysis: 50 had combined cataract surgery and trabeculectomy (trabeculectomy group), 50 had combined cataract surgery and GDD implantation (GDD group), and 106 had cataract surgery alone (control group). Refractive prediction error and absolute prediction error of each glaucoma surgery group were compared with the control group. Subgroup analysis was performed in the following axial length (AL) subgroups: short (<22.5 mm), medium (≥22.5 to <25.5 mm), and long (≥25.5 mm). RESULTS In total, 206 eyes were examined. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall refractive prediction error between the GDD (0.00 ± 0.54 diopters [D]) and the control group (0.10 ± 0.53 D, P = .58). There was significant myopic refractive prediction error in the trabeculectomy group (-0.18 ± 0.88 D, P = .020). In eyes with short AL, a greater absolute prediction error was observed in the GDD group (-0.75 ± 0.43 D, P = .039). CONCLUSIONS Apart from a significant deviation in short AL eyes, combined cataract surgery and GDD implantation demonstrated no significant postoperative refractive prediction error.
Collapse
|
11
|
Asano S, Yamashita T, Asaoka R, Fujino Y, Murata H, Terasaki H, Yoshihara N, Kakiuchi N, Sakamoto T. Retinal vessel shift and its association with axial length elongation in a prospective observation in Japanese junior high school students. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0250233. [PMID: 33886637 PMCID: PMC8062002 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2020] [Accepted: 04/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate retinal vessel shift (RVS) and its association with axial length (AL) elongation in junior high school students. METHODS Total 161 eyes of 161 healthy junior high school students were prospectively studied. Optical AL and anterior chamber depth (ACD) measurements, and fundus photography were performed in the first and third grades. Eyes of subjects in the first and third grade that had perfect matching among all the retinal vessels were allocated to the RVS(-) group, otherwise allocated to the RVS(+) group. In the RVS(+) group, the peripapillary retinal arteries angle (PRAA) was measured for quantitative analysis of RVS; the angle between the major retinal arteries. The variables related to PRAA were identified using model selection with the corrected Akaike information criterion. RESULTS Forty-two eyes (26.1%) were allocated to the RVS(+) group. There were seven patterns in the RVS of those in the RVS(+) group, including clockwise shift in the supra temporal area (5 eyes), infra temporal area (7 eyes), and nasal area (9 eyes); anticlockwise shift in the supra temporal area (7 eyes), infra temporal area (5 eyes), and nasal area (2 eyes); and distal shift in the temporal area (7 eyes). The optimal model for the PRAA narrowing included larger AL and body weight in the first grade, and greater AL elongation. CONCLUSION Various (seven) RVS patterns were observed in about 25% of the junior high school students within two years. RVS was associated with AL elongation, and useful to reveal the mechanism of myopic retinal stretch.
Collapse
|
12
|
Asano S, Murata H, Fujino Y, Yamashita T, Miki A, Ikeda Y, Mori K, Tanito M, Asaoka R. Investigating the clinical usefulness of definitions of progression with 10-2 visual field. Br J Ophthalmol 2021; 106:1098-1103. [PMID: 33674424 DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-318188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2020] [Revised: 12/30/2020] [Accepted: 02/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM To investigate the clinical validity of the Guided Progression Analysis definition (GPAD) and cluster-based definition (CBD) with the Humphrey Field Analyzer 10-2 test in diagnosing glaucomatous visual field (VF) progression, and to introduce a novel definition with optimised specificity by combining the 'any-location' and 'cluster-based' approaches (hybrid definition). METHODS 64 400 stable glaucomatous VFs were simulated from 664 pairs of 10-2 tests (10 sets × 10 VF series × 664 eyes; data set 1). Using these simulated VFs, the specificity to detect progression and the effects of changing the parameters (number of test locations or consecutive VF tests, and percentile cut-off values) were investigated. The hybrid definition was designed as the combination where the specificity was closest to 95.0%. Subsequently, another 5000 actual glaucomatous 10-2 tests from 500 eyes (10 VFs each) were collected (data set 2), and their accuracy (sensitivity, specificity and false positive rate) and the time needed to detect VF progression were evaluated. RESULTS The specificity values calculated using data set 1 with GPAD and CBD were 99.6% and 99.8%. Using data set 2, the hybrid definition had a higher sensitivity than GPAD and CBD, without detriment to the specificity or false positive rate. The hybrid definition also detected progression significantly earlier than GPAD and CBD (at 3.1 years vs 4.2 years and 4.1 years, respectively). CONCLUSIONS GPAD and CBD had specificities of 99.6% and 99.8%, respectively. A novel hybrid definition (with a specificity of 95.5%) had higher sensitivity and enabled earlier detection of progression.
Collapse
|
13
|
Asano S, Asaoka R, Murata H, Hashimoto Y, Miki A, Mori K, Ikeda Y, Kanamoto T, Yamagami J, Inoue K. Predicting the central 10 degrees visual field in glaucoma by applying a deep learning algorithm to optical coherence tomography images. Sci Rep 2021; 11:2214. [PMID: 33500462 PMCID: PMC7838164 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-79494-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2020] [Accepted: 12/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
We aimed to develop a model to predict visual field (VF) in the central 10 degrees in patients with glaucoma, by training a convolutional neural network (CNN) with optical coherence tomography (OCT) images and adjusting the values with Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 24–2 test. The training dataset included 558 eyes from 312 glaucoma patients and 90 eyes from 46 normal subjects. The testing dataset included 105 eyes from 72 glaucoma patients. All eyes were analyzed by the HFA 10-2 test and OCT; eyes in the testing dataset were additionally analyzed by the HFA 24-2 test. During CNN model training, the total deviation (TD) values of the HFA 10-2 test point were predicted from the combined OCT-measured macular retinal layers’ thicknesses. Then, the predicted TD values were corrected using the TD values of the innermost four points from the HFA 24-2 test. Mean absolute error derived from the CNN models ranged between 9.4 and 9.5 B. These values reduced to 5.5 dB on average, when the data were corrected using the HFA 24-2 test. In conclusion, HFA 10-2 test results can be predicted with a OCT images using a trained CNN model with adjustment using HFA 24-2 test.
Collapse
|
14
|
Inoue T, Nakajima K, Hashimoto Y, Asano S, Kitamoto K, Azuma K, Azuma K, Kadonosono K, Obata R, Asaoka R. A Prediction Method of Visual Field Sensitivity Using Fundus Autofluorescence Images in Patients With Retinitis Pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2021; 61:51. [PMID: 32857103 PMCID: PMC7463201 DOI: 10.1167/iovs.61.10.51] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between fundus autofluorescence (FAF) and visual field (VF) sensitivities in eyes with retinitis pigmentosa (RP). We also investigated the model we developed to predict VF sensitivity using the FAF ring and its prediction accuracy. Methods The training dataset consisted of 51 eyes of 28 patients, and the testing dataset consisted of 42 eyes of 25 patients with RP. VF and FAF measurements were conducted using the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 10-2 test and Optos. The HFA 10-2 test was divided into three sectors according to the association with the FAF (IN, ON, and OUT). Moreover, concentric curves were drawn at 1-degree intervals outside the FAF ring and OUT was divided into six sectors (from OUT1 to OUT6 toward the periphery). Finally, the total deviation (TD) value was predicted using age and visual acuity (VA) in the whole field, and each of the eight sectors was compared. Results The TD value decreased significantly from IN, ON, and then toward OUT6. The absolute prediction error with the FAF ring (average, 7.6 dB) was significantly smaller than that without the FAF ring (average, 8.7 dB). The absolute prediction error with the FAF ring was significantly smaller in the central areas (IN, 4.4 dB and ON, 5.3 dB) than those in the peripheral areas (OUT1-6, 6.8-9.1 dB). Conclusions VF sensitivity decreases in association with the FAF ring. We developed a model to predict 10-2 VF sensitivity values using the FAF ring, which enabled us to predict 10-2 TD values.
Collapse
|
15
|
Zhou HP, Asaoka R, Inoue T, Asano S, Murata H, Hara T, Makino S, Kadonosono K, Obata R. Short wavelength automated perimetry and standard automated perimetry in central serous chorioretinopathy. Sci Rep 2020; 10:16451. [PMID: 33020543 PMCID: PMC7536216 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-73569-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2020] [Accepted: 09/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Short wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) is known for detecting the early reduction of retinal sensitivity (RS) in glaucoma. It’s application in retinal diseases have also been discussed previously. We investigated the difference in RS measured between standard white-on-white automated perimetry (WW) and blue-on-yellow SWAP in central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC). The overall RS (W-RS, S-RS) as well as the RS inside and outside of the serous retinal detachment (SRD) region were investigated in 26 eyes of 26 CSC patients using WW and SWAP. The central retinal thickness, central choroidal thickness, SRD area (SRDa), and SRD height at the fovea were measured using optic coherence tomography. RS inside the SRD region was lower than that of outside for both perimetries (both p < 0.001). The difference between RS inside and outside of the SRD region was greater in SWAP compared to WW (p < 0.001). Univariate analysis revealed significant correlations between SRDa and both W-RS and S-RS (both p < 0.001); moreover, multivariate analysis indicated that only S-RS was selected as the optimal model for SRDa. Our study demonstrated that SWAP was detected the decrease in RS more accurately than WW in CSC. These results may suggest the usefulness of SWAP for detecting change of retinal function in CSC.
Collapse
|
16
|
Xu L, Asaoka R, Kiwaki T, Murata H, Fujino Y, Matsuura M, Hashimoto Y, Asano S, Miki A, Mori K, Ikeda Y, Kanamoto T, Yamagami J, Inoue K, Tanito M, Yamanishi K. Predicting the Glaucomatous Central 10-Degree Visual Field From Optical Coherence Tomography Using Deep Learning and Tensor Regression. Am J Ophthalmol 2020; 218:304-313. [PMID: 32387432 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.04.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2019] [Revised: 04/27/2020] [Accepted: 04/27/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To predict the visual field (VF) of glaucoma patients within the central 10° from optical coherence tomography (OCT) measurements using deep learning and tensor regression. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. METHODS Humphrey 10-2 VFs and OCT measurements were carried out in 505 eyes of 304 glaucoma patients and 86 eyes of 43 normal subjects. VF sensitivity at each test point was predicted from OCT-measured thicknesses of macular ganglion cell layer + inner plexiform layer, retinal nerve fiber layer, and outer segment + retinal pigment epithelium. Two convolutional neural network (CNN) models were generated: (1) CNN-PR, which simply connects the output of the CNN to each VF test point; and (2) CNN-TR, which connects the output of the CNN to each VF test point using tensor regression. Prediction performance was assessed using 5-fold cross-validation through the root mean squared error (RMSE). For comparison, RMSE values were also calculated using multiple linear regression (MLR) and support vector regression (SVR). In addition, the absolute prediction error for predicting mean sensitivity in the whole VF was analyzed. RESULTS RMSE with the CNN-TR model averaged 6.32 ± 3.76 (mean ± standard deviation) dB. Significantly (P < .05) larger RMSEs were obtained with other models: CNN-PR (6.76 ± 3.86 dB), SVR (7.18 ± 3.87 dB), and MLR (8.56 ± 3.69 dB). The absolute mean prediction error for the whole VF was 2.72 ± 2.60 dB with the CNN-TR model. CONCLUSION The Humphrey 10-2 VF can be predicted from OCT-measured retinal layer thicknesses using deep learning and tensor regression.
Collapse
|
17
|
Hashimoto Y, Asaoka R, Kiwaki T, Sugiura H, Asano S, Murata H, Fujino Y, Matsuura M, Miki A, Mori K, Ikeda Y, Kanamoto T, Yamagami J, Inoue K, Tanito M, Yamanishi K. Deep learning model to predict visual field in central 10° from optical coherence tomography measurement in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2020; 105:507-513. [PMID: 32593978 DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2019-315600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2019] [Revised: 03/31/2020] [Accepted: 05/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM To train and validate the prediction performance of the deep learning (DL) model to predict visual field (VF) in central 10° from spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). METHODS This multicentre, cross-sectional study included paired Humphrey field analyser (HFA) 10-2 VF and SD-OCT measurements from 591 eyes of 347 patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) or normal subjects for the training data set. We trained a convolutional neural network (CNN) for predicting VF threshold (TH) sensitivity values from the thickness of the three macular layers: retinal nerve fibre layer, ganglion cell layer+inner plexiform layer and outer segment+retinal pigment epithelium. We implemented pattern-based regularisation on top of CNN to avoid overfitting. Using an external testing data set of 160 eyes of 131 patients with OAG, the prediction performance (absolute error (AE) and R2 between predicted and actual TH values) was calculated for (1) mean TH in whole VF and (2) each TH of 68 points. For comparison, we trained support vector machine (SVM) and multiple linear regression (MLR). RESULTS AE of whole VF with CNN was 2.84±2.98 (mean±SD) dB, significantly smaller than those with SVM (5.65±5.12 dB) and MLR (6.96±5.38 dB) (all, p<0.001). Mean of point-wise mean AE with CNN was 5.47±3.05 dB, significantly smaller than those with SVM (7.96±4.63 dB) and MLR (11.71±4.15 dB) (all, p<0.001). R2 with CNN was 0.74 for the mean TH of whole VF, and 0.44±0.24 for the overall 68 points. CONCLUSION DL model showed considerably accurate prediction of HFA 10-2 VF from SD-OCT.
Collapse
|
18
|
Asaoka R, Murata H, Asano S, Matsuura M, Fujino Y, Miki A, Tanito M, Mizoue S, Mori K, Suzuki K, Yamashita T, Kashiwagi K, Shoji N. The usefulness of the Deep Learning method of variational autoencoder to reduce measurement noise in glaucomatous visual fields. Sci Rep 2020; 10:7893. [PMID: 32398783 PMCID: PMC7217822 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-64869-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2019] [Accepted: 02/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the usefulness of processing visual field (VF) using a variational autoencoder (VAE). The training data consisted of 82,433 VFs from 16,836 eyes. Testing dataset 1 consisted of test-retest VFs from 104 eyes with open angle glaucoma. Testing dataset 2 was series of 10 VFs from 638 eyes with open angle glaucoma. A VAE model to reconstruct VF was developed using the training dataset. VFs in the testing dataset 1 were then reconstructed using the trained VAE and the mean total deviation (mTD) was calculated (mTDVAE). In testing dataset 2, the mTD value of the tenth VF was predicted using shorter series of VFs. A similar calculation was carried out using a weighted linear regression where the weights were equal to the absolute difference between mTD and mTDVAE. In testing dataset 1, there was a significant relationship between the difference between mTD and mTDVAE from the first VF and the difference between mTD in the first and second VFs. In testing dataset 2, mean squared prediction errors with the weighted mTD trend analysis were significantly smaller than those form the unweighted mTD trend analysis.
Collapse
|
19
|
Asano S, Chang VKT, Aquino MCD, Kuan PCT. Use of micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation for acute rise in intraocular pressure due to anterior segment inflammation. Eur J Ophthalmol 2020; 31:NP36-NP39. [PMID: 32380863 DOI: 10.1177/1120672120924341] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to report the use of micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation as an adjunct therapy for two cases of medically uncontrolled intraocular pressure spikes due to anterior segment inflammation.Case description: Case 1 had previous cataract surgery and exhibited an intraocular pressure spike due to phacoantigenic uveitis (right eye intraocular pressure = 52 mmHg). Despite medical treatment, the right eye intraocular pressure remained high (43 mmHg), thus micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation was carried out as a rescue therapy. After micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation, the intraocular pressure at 1 day and 3 weeks was 9 and 16 mmHg, respectively. Case 2 had a history of previous blunt ocular trauma and 180° of angle recession. Both eyes were pseudophakia and underwent right eye Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy for posterior capsular opacification. Immediately after the procedure, the right eye intraocular pressure increased to 64 mmHg. Due to poor response to medical therapy, rescue micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation was performed. After micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation, the intraocular pressure at 1 day and 2 months was 12 and 21 mmHg, respectively. CONCLUSION Micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation successfully decreased intraocular pressure in both cases of acute rise in intraocular pressure. Micropulse trans-scleral cyclophotocoagulation can potentially be useful as a rescue procedure to safely reduce medically uncontrollable intraocular pressure spike due to anterior segment inflammation.
Collapse
|
20
|
Asano S, Asaoka R, Yamashita T, Aoki S, Matsuura M, Fujino Y, Murata H, Nakakura S, Nakao Y, Kiuchi Y. Visualizing the dynamic change of Ocular Response Analyzer waveform using Variational Autoencoder in association with the peripapillary retinal arteries angle. Sci Rep 2020; 10:6592. [PMID: 32313133 PMCID: PMC7170838 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-63601-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2019] [Accepted: 03/31/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of the current study is to identify possible new Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) waveform parameters related to changes of retinal structure/deformation, as measured by the peripapillary retinal arteries angle (PRAA), using a generative deep learning method of variational autoencoder (VAE). Fifty-four eyes of 52 subjects were enrolled. The PRAA was calculated from fundus photographs and was used to train a VAE model. By analyzing the ORA waveform reconstructed (noise filtered) using VAE, a novel ORA waveform parameter (Monot1-2), was introduced, representing the change in monotonicity between the first and second applanation peak of the waveform. The variables mostly related to the PRAA were identified from a set of 41 variables including age, axial length (AL), keratometry, ORA corneal hysteresis, ORA corneal resistant factor, 35 well established ORA waveform parameters, and Monot1-2, using a model selection method based on the second-order bias-corrected Akaike information criterion. The optimal model for PRAA was the AL and six ORA waveform parameters, including Monot1-2. This optimal model was significantly better than the model without Monot1-2 (p = 0.0031, ANOVA). The current study suggested the value of a generative deep learning approach in discovering new useful parameters that may have clinical relevance.
Collapse
|
21
|
Asano-Shimizu K, Asano S, Murata H, Azuma K, Nomura Y, Inoue T, Ogawa A, Asaoka R, Obata R. Early changes of vascular lesions and responses to combined photodynamic therapy in patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy. Int Ophthalmol 2020; 40:1335-1345. [PMID: 32026179 DOI: 10.1007/s10792-020-01299-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2019] [Accepted: 01/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate early changes of vascular lesions and their associations with the early responses to combined photodynamic therapy (PDT) in eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV). METHODS This study evaluated 19 eyes of 19 patients with PCV who underwent PDT combined with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections and were followed for 3 months. All subjects were examined 1 week and 1, 2, and 3 months after combined PDT. "Active" cases were defined as recurrence or persistence of serous retinal detachment or subretinal hemorrhage detected within 3 months. Branching vascular networks (BVNs) were evaluated by optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) and polyps by indocyanine-green angiography. RESULTS In total, 16%, 58%, 84%, and 89% of eyes displayed BVNs 1 week, 1, 2, and 3 months after PDT, respectively. BVNs were detected significantly more often 1 month after PDT in the "active" group than "inactive" group (89% vs. 30%, p = 0.020). There were significantly higher overall proportions of BVNs detected by OCTA in the "active" group than "inactive" group (p = 0.0058). CONCLUSION In most cases, BVNs disappeared once and gradually appeared again within 3 months. Detecting BVNs using OCTA from early phases could be a helpful biomarker to assess the early responses to PDT in eyes with PCV.
Collapse
|
22
|
Okamoto K, Asano S, Yamamoto T, Toyono T, Yamaguchi R, Okada Y, Okugawa S, Suzuki H, Moriya K, Aihara M. Poor penetration of cefcapene into aqueous humor after oral administration of cefcapene pivoxil to patients undergoing cataract surgery. J Infect Chemother 2019; 26:312-315. [PMID: 31481306 DOI: 10.1016/j.jiac.2019.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2019] [Revised: 07/18/2019] [Accepted: 08/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Studies on the penetration of orally administered cephalosporins to the aqueous humor are scarce. Therefore, in this study, we determined the concentration of cefcapene, a third-generation cephalosporin administrated orally as pivalate ester (cefcapene pivoxil), in the aqueous humor of patients undergoing cataract surgery to assess its potential for preventing postoperative endophthalmitis. METHODS Forty-four patients were administered a single dose of 100 mg cefcapene pivoxil preoperatively. Blood and aqueous humor samples were obtained at the time of surgery, and cefcapene concentrations were measured using ultra-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometric detection. RESULTS The samples were obtained from 41 eyes of 39 patients (two patients underwent surgery in both eyes). The median cefcapene concentrations in the aqueous humor after 1-2 h, 2-3 h, and later than 3 h were 8.3, 18.4, and 23.7 ng/mL, respectively. The median cefcapene concentrations in serum after 1-2 h, 2-3 h, and later than 3 h were 198.5, 287.2, and 170.3 ng/mL, respectively. Aqueous humor penetration of cefcapene after 1-2 h, 2-3 h, and later than 3 h was 4.1, 7.9, and 13.5% respectively. CONCLUSIONS Aqueous humor penetration of orally-administered cefcapene pivoxil in patients undergoing cataract surgery was poor. Therefore, cefcapene pivoxil was unlikely to be effective for preventing endophthalmitis after cataract surgery.
Collapse
|
23
|
Asano S, Asaoka R, Yamashita T, Aoki S, Matsuura M, Fujino Y, Murata H, Nakakura S, Nakao Y, Kiuchi Y. Correlation Between the Myopic Retinal Deformation and Corneal Biomechanical Characteristics Measured With the Corvis ST Tonometry. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2019; 8:26. [PMID: 31440423 PMCID: PMC6701875 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.8.4.26] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2019] [Accepted: 06/03/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose We previously reported that the retinal deformation due to myopia was represented by the peripapillary retinal arteries angle (PRAA). In this study, we investigated the relationship between the PRAA and biomechanical properties measured with Corvis ST (CST) tonometry. Methods Thirty-four normative eyes of 34 subjects who underwent CST measurement were enrolled. The PRAA was calculated from a fundus photograph. Variables related to the PRAA were identified from age, axial length, spherical equivalent refractive error, and 10 CST parameters using model selection with the second-order bias-corrected Akaike information criterion index. Results The PRAA was best described with axial length (coefficient = −5.66, P < 0.0001), maximum deflection amplitude (mm; coefficient = 130.5, P = 0.0004), and deflection amplitude ratio (DA ratio) 2 mm (coefficient = −25.8, P = 0.0032), where mm was the amount of the maximum corneal apex movement and DA ratio 2 mm was the ratio between the deformation amplitudes at the apex and 2 mm away from the apex. The optimal model was significantly better than the model only with axial length (P = 0.0014, analysis of variance). Conclusions The PRAA was significantly better described with the CST parameters compared to the axial length model only; eyes with small PRAA (larger myopic retinal deformation) showed narrow and shallow maximum corneal deflection. Translational Relevance The Corvis ST parameters, which represents corneal biomechanical characteristics, were associated with myopic retinal deformation.
Collapse
|
24
|
Wen JJ, Huang H, Lee SJ, Jang H, Knight J, Lee YS, Fujita M, Suzuki KM, Asano S, Kivelson SA, Kao CC, Lee JS. Observation of two types of charge-density-wave orders in superconducting La 2-xSr xCuO 4. Nat Commun 2019; 10:3269. [PMID: 31332190 PMCID: PMC6646325 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-11167-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2019] [Accepted: 06/13/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
The discovery of charge- and spin-density-wave (CDW/SDW) orders in superconducting cuprates has altered our perspective on the nature of high-temperature superconductivity (SC). However, it has proven difficult to fully elucidate the relationship between the density wave orders and SC. Here, using resonant soft X-ray scattering, we study the archetypal cuprate La2-xSrxCuO4 (LSCO) over a broad doping range. We reveal the existence of two types of CDW orders in LSCO, namely CDW stripe order and CDW short-range order (SRO). While the CDW-SRO is suppressed by SC, it is partially transformed into the CDW stripe order with developing SDW stripe order near the superconducting Tc. These findings indicate that the stripe orders and SC are inhomogeneously distributed in the superconducting CuO2 planes of LSCO. This further suggests a new perspective on the putative pair-density-wave order that coexists with SC, SDW, and CDW orders. To fully elucidate the relationship between density wave orders and superconductivity in high-Tc cuprates remains difficult. Here, the authors reveal two types of charge-density-wave orders and their intertwined relationship with spin-density-wave order and superconductivity in La2-xSrxCuO4.
Collapse
|
25
|
Asano S, Murata H, Matsuura M, Fujino Y, Miki A, Tanito M, Mizoue S, Mori K, Suzuki K, Yamashita T, Kashiwagi K, Shoji N, Zangwill LM, Asaoka R. Validating the efficacy of the binomial pointwise linear regression method to detect glaucoma progression with multicentral database. Br J Ophthalmol 2019; 104:569-574. [PMID: 31272952 DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2019-314136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2019] [Revised: 05/14/2019] [Accepted: 06/08/2019] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM We previously reported the benefit of applying binomial pointwise linear regression (PLR: binomial PLR) to detect 10-2 glaucomatous visual field (VF) progression. The purpose of the current study was to validate the usefulness of the binomial PLR to detect glaucomatous VF progression in the central 24°. METHODS Series of 15 VFs (Humphrey Field Analyzer 24-2 SITA-standard) from 341 eyes of 233 patients, obtained over 7.9±2.1 years (mean±SD), were investigated. PLR was performed by regressing the total deviation of all test points. VF progression was determined from the VF test points analyses using the binomial test (one side, p<0.025). The time needed to detect VF progression was compared across the binomial PLR, permutation analysis of PLR (PoPLR) and mean total deviation (mTD) trend analysis. RESULTS The binomial PLR was comparable with PoPLR and mTD trend analyses in the positive predictive value (0.18-0.87), the negative predictive value (0.89-0.95) and the false positive rate (0.057-0.35) to evaluate glaucomatous VF progression. The time to classify progression with binomial PLR (5.8±2.8 years) was significantly shorter than those with mTD trend analysis (6.7±2.8 years) and PoPLR (6.6±2.7 years). CONCLUSIONS The binomial PLR method, which detected glaucomatous VF progression in the central 24° significantly earlier than PoPLR and mTD trend analyses, shows promise for improving our ability to detect visual field progression for clinical management of glaucoma and in clinical trials of new glaucoma therapies.
Collapse
|