You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 124 No. 7, July 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Clinical Sciences
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Glaucoma
 •Articles for Residents
 •Genetics
 •Genetic Counseling/ Testing/ Therapy
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati
What's this?

Disease Severity of Familial Glaucoma Compared With Sporadic Glaucoma

Johnny Wu, MBBS; Alex W. Hewitt, MBBS; Catherine M. Green, FRANZCO; Maree A. Ring; Paul J. McCartney, FRANZCO; Jamie E. Craig, DPhil, FRANZCO; David A. Mackey, MD, FRANZCO

Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:950-954.

Objective  To determine whether there is a difference in disease severity between familial and sporadic primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).

Methods  A cross-sectional study design compared the distribution of Glaucoma Inheritance Study in Tasmania (GIST) severity scores of patients with genealogically confirmed familial POAG and those with sporadic POAG. The GIST severity scores provide a combined weighting of glaucoma severity based on findings from visual field defects and optic disc analysis, with and without intraocular pressure. A Poisson regression analysis, t test, and {chi}2 tests were performed.

Results  One thousand twelve (59.5%) of 1700 subjects had familial glaucoma. The mean ± SD age at examination was greater in the sporadic POAG group compared with the familial group (72.6 ± 10.3 years vs 70.6 ± 12.6 years; P = .001). The family group was significantly younger at diagnosis than the sporadic group (mean ± SD, 61.4 ± 13.0 years vs 64.0 ± 12.6 years; P<.001). The GIST severity scores were significantly skewed toward greater disease severity in the familial group compared with the sporadic group (P<.001).

Conclusion  Identifying individuals at risk of severe POAG will be more successful if screening programs are developed with appropriate weighting toward those with a positive family history of the disease.


Author Affiliations: Department of Ophthalmology, Royal Hobart Hospital, University of Tasmania, Hobart (Drs Wu, Hewitt, Green, McCartney, and Mackey and Ms Ring), Department of Ophthalmology, Flinders University, Adelaide (Drs Hewitt, Craig, and Mackey), Clinical Genetics Unit, Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne (Drs Green and Mackey), Australia.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Chase the Family
Harry A. Quigley
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124(7):1036-1037.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Chase the Family
Quigley
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:1036-1037.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.