Purpose: To evaluate diabetic retinopathy (DR) progression in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 in 2 populations of different ethnicity. Methods: A prospective observational study was designed to follow eyes/patients with mild nonproliferative DR, for 2 years or until the development of central-involved macular edema (CIME), in 2 centers from different regions of the world. A total of 205 eyes/patients fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were included in this study. Ophthalmological examinations, fundus photography with RetmarkerDR analysis, and optical coherence tomography were performed at baseline and at 6, 12 and 24 months. Results: Of the 158 eyes/patients that completed this study, 24 eyes developed CIME and 134 eyes were present at the last study visit. Eighty-eight eyes (56.4%) were classified as phenotype A, 49 (31.4%) as phenotype B, and 19 (12.2%) as phenotype C. Phenotype A is associated with a very low risk for development of CIME in comparison with phenotypes B and C. The OR for development of CIME was 19.0 for phenotype B and 25.1 for phenotype C. Conclusion: Eyes in the initial stages of DR show different phenotypes with different risks of progression to ME. The phenotypes associated with increased risks of progression show different distributions in patients of different ethnicities.

Keywords:
Biomarkers, Diabetes, Macular edema, Nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, Phenotypes
1.
Aiello LP, Gardner TW, King GL, Blankenship G, Cavallerano JD, Ferris FL, et al: Diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care 1998;21:143-156.
2.
Henricsson M, Tyrberg M, Heijl A, Janzon L: Incidence of blindness and visual impairment in diabetic patients participating in an ophthalmological control and screening programme. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2009;74:533-538.
3.
Kempen JH, O'Colmain BJ, Leske MC, Haffner SM, Klein R, Moss SE, et al: The prevalence of diabetic retinopathy among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:552-563.
4.
Cunha-Vaz J, Bernardes R: Nonproliferative retinopathy in diabetes type 2: initial stages and characterization of phenotypes. Prog Retin Eye Res 2005;24:355-377.
5.
Lobo CL, Bernardes RC, Figueira JP, de Abreu JRF, Cunha-Vaz JG: Three-year follow-up study of blood-retinal barrier and retinal thickness alterations in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mild nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:211-217.
6.
Nunes S, Pires I, Rosa A, Duarte L, Bernardes R, Cunha-Vaz J: Microaneurysm turnover is a biomarker for diabetic retinopathy progression to clinically significant macular edema: findings for type 2 diabetics with nonproliferative retinopathy. Ophthalmologica 2009;223:292-297.
7.
Nunes S, Ribeiro L, Lobo C, Cunha-Vaz J: Three different phenotypes of mild nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy with different risks for development of clinically significant macular edema. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2013;54:4595-4604.
8.
Chalam KV, Bressler SB, Edwards AR, Berger BB, Bressler NM, Glassman AR, et al: Retinal thickness in people with diabetes and minimal or no diabetic retinopathy: Heidelberg Spectralis optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2012;53:8154-8161.
9.
Ribeiro ML, Nunes S, Cunha-Vaz J: Microaneurysm turnover at the macula predicts risk of development of clinically significant macular edema in persons with mild nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care 2013;36:1254-1259.
10.
Bressler NM, Miller KM, Beck RW, Bressler SB, Glassman a R, Kitchens JW, et al: Observational study of subclinical diabetic macular edema. Eye (Lond) 2012;26:833-840.
11.
Browning DJ, Fraser CM: The predictive value of patient and eye characteristics on the course of subclinical diabetic macular edema. Am J Ophthalmol 2008;145:149-154.
12.
Pires I, Santos AR, Nunes S, Lobo C, Cunha-Vaz J: Subclinical macular edema as a predictor of progression to clinically significant macular edema in type 2 diabetes. Ophthalmologica 2013;230:201-206.
13.
Friedman SM, Almukhtar TH, Baker CW, Glassman AR, Elman MJ, Bressler NM, et al: Topical nepafenec in eyes with noncentral diabetic macular edema. Retina 2015;35:944-956.
14.
Duarte L, Santos A, Geraldes E, Nunes S, Bernardes R, Cunha-Vaz J: Risk markers for the development of severe macular edema needing photocoagulation in mild nonproliferative retinopathy in type 2 diabetes: a seven year follow-up. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:1008.
15.
Cunha-Vaz J, Ribeiro L, Costa M, Simó R: Diabetic retinopathy phenotypes of progression to macular edema: pooled analysis from independent longitudinal studies of up to two years' duration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci DOI: 10.1167/iovs.17-21780.
16.
Aspelund T, et al: Individual risk assessment and information technology to optimise screening frequency for diabetic retinopathy. Diabetologia 2011;54:2525-2532.
17.
Das R, Kerr R, Chakravarthy U, Hogg RE: Dyslipidemia and diabetic macular edema. Ophthalmology 2015;122:1820-1827.
18.
Wong TY, Klein R, Islam FMA, Cotch MF, Folsom AR, Klein BEK, et al: Diabetic retinopathy in a multi-ethnic cohort in the United States. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;141:446-455.e1.
19.
Varma R, Bressler NM, Doan Q V, Gleeson M, Danese M, Bower JK, et al: Prevalence of and risk factors for diabetic macular edema in the United States. JAMA Ophthalmol 2014;132:1334.
20.
American Diabetes Association: Cardiovascular disease and risk management. Diabetes Care 2016;39(suppl 1):S60-S71.
21.
Mathur R, Bhaskaran K, Edwards E, Lee H, Chaturvedi N, Smeeth L, et al: Population trends in the 10-year incidence and prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in the UK: a cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink 2004-2014. BMJ Open 2017;7:e014444.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.