4.4 Article

Environmental and genetic risk factors for retinal angiomatous proliferation

Journal

ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA
Volume 92, Issue 8, Pages 745-748

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/aos.12437

Keywords

age-related macular degeneration; ARMS2; CFH; hypertension; retinal angiomatous proliferation; risk factor

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeTo identify genetic and environmental risk factors in patients with retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP), a clinical subtype of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). MethodsIn this case-control study, 108 AMD cases with RAP, 258 AMD patients with choroidal neovascularization (CNV) without RAP and 443 healthy controls were evaluated. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in age-related maculopathy susceptibility 2 (ARMS2) and complement factor H (CFH) and various environmental risk factors were analysed. Statistical analysis was performed by univariate and multivariate regression analysis. ResultsHigh age, female sex and genetic variants in CFH and ARMS2 were identified as risk factors for developing any CNV. In RAP patients, arterial hypertension was also identified as a risk factor (OR 2.39; p=0.0005). Compared with the non-RAP' CNV group, the association with high age (OR 1.05; p=0.008) and arterial hypertension (OR 1.82; p=0.02) was significantly higher in RAP patients, while the association with CFH risk alleles (homozygous OR 0.40; p=0.003) was significantly lower, which was confirmed in a multivariate analysis (OR 0.41; p=0.03 for the heterozygous risk allele and OR 0.38; p=0.03 for the homozygous risk allele). ConclusionThe association with the CFH Y402 risk allele was less pronounced in RAP patients than in non-RAP' CNV patients, while the association with high age and arterial hypertension appeared to be stronger. These findings stress the importance of detailed phenotyping in AMD to identify homogeneous AMD subtypes and their different risk factors and disease mechanisms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available