Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose: To evaluate the temporal behavior and relative variability of a margin-based metric, lesion front displacement, for quantifying geographic atrophy (GA) progression secondary to age-related macular degeneration and to compare its performance with conventional metrics. Methods: This retrospective longitudinal analysis included 103 untreated fellow eyes from the MAHALO clinical trial with GA and 18-month follow-up. Fundus autofluorescence images were obtained at baseline and 6, 12, and 18 months. Five progression metrics were calculated: total area change, square root area change, total perimeter change, perimeter-adjusted growth rate (λ'PA), and lesion front displacement. Linearity was assessed using simple linear regression and the Harvey-Collier test. Variability was evaluated using standard deviation, variance ratios, and the Fligner-Killeen test. Results: Linearity was rejected for area and square root area change but not for lesion front displacement, perimeter change, or λ'PA. Lesion front displacement showed a relatively higher coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.504), whereas area (0.116), square root area (0.104), perimeter (0.001), and λ'PA (0.018) exhibited lower goodness of fit to a linear model. Lesion front displacement demonstrated lower dispersion across follow-up intervals. Variance ratio analysis indicated greater variability for all comparator metrics. Variability was significantly lower for lesion front displacement than for perimeter change and λ'PA at 12 and 18 months (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Lesion front displacement demonstrated more consistent linear approximation and lower variability compared with several conventional GA progression metrics. This margin-based approach may serve as a complementary metric for longitudinal assessment of GA progression.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chujo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: