Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 26 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology

Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers in Nonproliferative and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: Marmasia Study Group Report No. 2

10 more authors
14 affiliations
  1. 1Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Vitreoretinal Department, Manchester, United Kingdom
  2. 2University of Health Sciences Türkiye, Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  3. 3University of Health Sciences Türkiye, Haydarpaşa Numune Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  4. 4University of Health Sciences Türkiye, Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  5. 5Marmara University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  6. 6Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology, Kocaeli, Türkiye
  7. 7Acıbadem Maslak Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  8. 8University of Health Sciences Türkiye, Kartal Dr. Lütfi Kırdar City Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  9. 9Medipol University Pendik Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  10. 10Sakarya Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, Sakarya, Türkiye
  11. 11Dünyagöz Eye Hospital, İstanbul, Türkiye
  12. 12Medicana Ataşehir Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  13. 13Memorial Şişli Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye
  14. 14Medipol Acıbadem Regional Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, İstanbul, Türkiye

Abstract

Objectives: To compare structural optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers and visual acuity between eyes with nonproliferative (NPDR) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) in real-life clinical settings.

Materials and Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional, multicentre study included 818 eyes of 534 patients with treatment-naive diabetic macular oedema (DMO) from nine tertiary clinics. Evaluated parameters included central macular thickness (CMT), DMO morphology, disorganisation of the retinal inner layers, ellipsoid zone (EZ) integrity, vitreoretinal interface abnormality (VRIA), and posterior hyaloid status. Analyses used eye-level data with patient-clustered robust standard errors and study-centre fixed effects. A joint multivariable logistic model mutually adjusted EZ integrity, posterior hyaloid status and VRIA together with clinical covariates, with Holm correction across six structural-domain tests.

Results: Of the 818 eyes, 646 had NPDR and 172 PDR. Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was worse in PDR (0.74±0.54 versus 0.57±0.42 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; p<0.001). In univariable clustered comparisons, no biomarker survived false discovery rate correction across ten comparisons (lowest q=0.095, VRIA). In the joint model (636 eyes, 431 clusters), none survived Holm correction: posterior hyaloid detachment was nominally associated with PDR (odds ratio [OR] 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-3.92; Holm p=0.208), the global EZ term was not significant (p=0.221), and VRIA was not significant after adjustment for posterior hyaloid status (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.67-2.75; p=0.388). Centre-adjusted CMT did not differ (p=0.890). Secondarily, PDR, disrupted EZ, higher CMT and VRIA were each associated with worse BCVA.

Conclusion: In treatment-naive DMO, no structural OCT biomarker was independently associated with proliferative disease after accounting for fellow-eye correlation, centre effects, mutual adjustment, and multiplicity. Posterior hyaloid detachment gave the most consistent nominal signal, and the vitreoretinal interface variables carried overlapping rather than independent information. These findings do not establish prognosis.

Related

  1. Comparison of Intravitreal Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy in Treatment-Naïve vs Panretinal Photocoagulation–Treated Eyes With Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy
    J. Fernando Arevalo, Andres F. Lasave, Lihteh Wu +15
    Journal of Vitreoretinal DiseasesPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text1 citedGeneral medicinePMC
  2. Choroidal vascularity index changes in proliferative and nonproliferative macular telangiectasia type 2
    Zeynep Eylul Ercan, Gulsah Gokgoz, İmren Akkoyun +1
    Taiwan Journal of OphthalmologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineDOAJ
  3. Impact of Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Scan Protocols on Quantitative Microvascular Biomarkers in Diabetic Retinopathy.
    Wenjun Song, Ryan Zi Lin Tan, Ayush Jayakrishnan +19
    Translational vision science & technologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. Rates of nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) regression among patients with very mild or mild NPDR in an Indian Health Service teleophthalmology program, 2015 – 2020
    Sven-Erik Bursell, Stephanie J. Fonda, Kaitlynn Borik +2
    PLOS OnePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textEndocrinology & metabolismNutritionPLOS
  5. Successful management of high-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy during pregnancy with intravitreal faricimab
    Oxford medical case reportsPeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
BibTeX
@article{saygın2026comparison,
  title = {{Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers in Nonproliferative and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: Marmasia Study Group Report No. 2}},
  author = {Işılay Özsoy Saygın and Esra Kumral Türkseven and Fatih Bilgehan Kaplan and Mehmet Orkun Sevik and Tuğba Aydoğan Gezginaslan and Ecem Önder Tokuç and Hatice Selen Sönmez Kanar and Işıl Kutlutürk Karagöz and Uğur Yayla and Erkan Çelik and Ayşe Demirciler Sönmez and Aslan Aykut and Utku Limon and Erdinç Bozkurt and Nimet Yeşim Erçalık and Özlem Aydın Öncü and Ece Başaran Emengen and Abdullah Özkaya and Banu Açıkalın Öncel and Melda Nursal Yenerel and Özlem Şahin and Veysel Levent Karabaş},
  journal = {Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.24196},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.24196},
  note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers in Nonproliferative and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: Marmasia Study Group Report No. 2
AU  - Işılay Özsoy Saygın
AU  - Esra Kumral Türkseven
AU  - Fatih Bilgehan Kaplan
AU  - Mehmet Orkun Sevik
AU  - Tuğba Aydoğan Gezginaslan
AU  - Ecem Önder Tokuç
AU  - Hatice Selen Sönmez Kanar
AU  - Işıl Kutlutürk Karagöz
AU  - Uğur Yayla
AU  - Erkan Çelik
AU  - Ayşe Demirciler Sönmez
AU  - Aslan Aykut
AU  - Utku Limon
AU  - Erdinç Bozkurt
AU  - Nimet Yeşim Erçalık
AU  - Özlem Aydın Öncü
AU  - Ece Başaran Emengen
AU  - Abdullah Özkaya
AU  - Banu Açıkalın Öncel
AU  - Melda Nursal Yenerel
AU  - Özlem Şahin
AU  - Veysel Levent Karabaş
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/01
JO  - Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology
DO  - 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.24196
UR  - https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.24196
AB  - Objectives: To compare structural optical coherence tomography (OCT) biomarkers and visual acuity between eyes with nonproliferative (NPDR) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) in real-life clinical settings.  Materials and Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional, multicentre study included 818 eyes of 534 patients with treatment-naive diabetic macular oedema (DMO) from nine tertiary clinics. Evaluated parameters included central macular thickness (CMT), DMO morphology, disorganisation of the retinal inner layers, ellipsoid zone (EZ) integrity, vitreoretinal interface abnormality (VRIA), and posterior hyaloid status. Analyses used eye-level data with patient-clustered robust standard errors and study-centre fixed effects. A joint multivariable logistic model mutually adjusted EZ integrity, posterior hyaloid status and VRIA together with clinical covariates, with Holm correction across six structural-domain tests.  Results: Of the 818 eyes, 646 had NPDR and 172 PDR. Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was worse in PDR (0.74±0.54 versus 0.57±0.42 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; p<0.001). In univariable clustered comparisons, no biomarker survived false discovery rate correction across ten comparisons (lowest q=0.095, VRIA). In the joint model (636 eyes, 431 clusters), none survived Holm correction: posterior hyaloid detachment was nominally associated with PDR (odds ratio [OR] 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-3.92; Holm p=0.208), the global EZ term was not significant (p=0.221), and VRIA was not significant after adjustment for posterior hyaloid status (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.67-2.75; p=0.388). Centre-adjusted CMT did not differ (p=0.890). Secondarily, PDR, disrupted EZ, higher CMT and VRIA were each associated with worse BCVA.  Conclusion: In treatment-naive DMO, no structural OCT biomarker was independently associated with proliferative disease after accounting for fellow-eye correlation, centre effects, mutual adjustment, and multiplicity. Posterior hyaloid detachment gave the most consistent nominal signal, and the vitreoretinal interface variables carried overlapping rather than independent information. These findings do not establish prognosis.
SN  - 2149-8695
SN  - 2149-8709
ER  -