This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Alabama at Birmingham. All participants provided written informed consent after the nature and purpose of the study were explained. Conduct of the study followed the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Baseline data from ALSTAR2 are used in this analysis. ALSTAR2 is a prospective cohort study on normal aging and early and intermediate AMD whose purpose is to validate with visual function testing retinal imaging characteristics in these conditions (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04112667, October 7, 2019).
37
Participants aged 60 years or older were recruited from the Callahan Eye Hospital Clinics, the clinical service of the University of Alabama at Birmingham Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences. Our focus was on forming three participant groups—those with early AMD and intermediate AMD and those in normal macular health. The clinic's electronic health record was used to search for patients with early or intermediate AMD using International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition, codes for these conditions (H35.30*; H35.31*; H35.36*). One of the investigators (C.O.) screened the charts to ensure that participants met the eligibility criteria. Exclusion criteria were (1) any eye condition or disease in either eye (other than early cataract) in the medical record that can impair vision, including diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, ocular hypertension, a history of retinal diseases (e.g., retinal vein occlusion, retinal degeneration), optic neuritis, corneal disease, previous ocular trauma or surgery, or a refractive error of 6 or more diopters; (2) neurological conditions that can impair vision or judgment including multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, stroke, Alzheimer's disease, seizure disorders, brain tumor, or traumatic brain injury; (3) psychiatric disorders that could impair the ability to follow directions, answer questions about health and functioning, or provide informed consent; (4) diabetes; and (5) any medical condition that causes liver disease, significant frailty, or was thought to be terminal. Persons in normal macular health were recruited with the same eligibility criteria, except that they did not have International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition, codes indicative of AMD. Letters were sent to potential participants, and the study coordinator followed up with a phone call to determine interest.
One eye was tested in each participant. The eye selected for testing was the eye with better acuity. If the eyes had the same acuity, then an eye was selected randomly. Classification into the three groups was based on a trained grader's evaluation of three-field, color fundus photographs taken with a digital camera (450+; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin CA) after dilation with 1% tropicamide and 2.5% phenylephrine hydrochloride. The Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) nine-step classification system
38 was used by a trained grader to identify the presence and severity of AMD in the eye, and group membership was determined on this basis. Group definitions were as follows: those eyes with normal macular health had AREDS grade 1, early AMD had grades 2 to 4, and intermediate AMD had grades 5 to 8. The grader was masked to all other participant characteristics. We also used the Beckman classification system
39 for identifying presence and severity of AMD. Normal aging was defined as grades 1 to 2, early AMD as grade 3, and intermediate AMD as grade 4.
Demographic information for birthdate, gender, and race/ethnicity was obtained through self-administered questionnaire. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, both established tests of pattern vision, were tested under photopic and mesopic background conditions. Best-corrected letter visual acuity under photopic conditions (100 cd/m
2) was assessed with the Electronic Visual Acuity tester (JAEB Center, Tampa FL)
40 and expressed as logarithm
10 of the minimum angle of resolution. Acuity was also tested under mesopic conditions while the participant viewed the display through a 2.0 log unit neutral density filter (mesopic condition, 1 cd/m
2).
41 Photopic contrast sensitivity for letters was tested (100 cd/m
2) with the Mars chart (Mars Perceptrix, Chappaqua NY),
42 and scored letter by letter defined as log contrast sensitivity. This test was also repeated under mesopic conditions using the 2.0 log unit neutral density filter (as described for acuity).
Steady-state light sensitivity for the same grid of perimetric target locations in the macula were tested under photopic, mesopic, and scotopic conditions (“steady-state” means that eyes were adapted to the background luminance of testing before testing began). The nontested eye was covered with an eye patch. Targets in all perimetry tests were 0.43° in diameter (Goldmann size III). The target grid had 21 test locations at 0° (fovea) and at 5°, 10°, and 12° in all quadrants for mesopic and photopic perimetry (described previously).
37 For scotopic perimetry, the grid was identical, except for the absence of a test spot in the rod-free fovea. For scotopic testing we used the S-MAIA microperimeter and a cyan (505 nm) target (iCare, Vantaa, Finland) (background level 0 cd/m
2). Participants were adapted to darkness for 30 minutes before scotopic testing. The S-MAIA was also used for mesopic testing with white targets (background level of 1.27 cd/m
2). S-MAIA measurements were done under dilation. Participants with high fixation errors (>30% for the S-MAIA) were removed from mesopic and scotopic light sensitivity analyses. A microperimeter for photopic testing was not available, so a Humphrey Field Analyzer 3 (Carl Zeiss Meditec) was used (background level of 10 cd/m
2). Participants with photopic testing fixation errors, false positives, or false negatives of 33% or more were excluded from the analysis of photopic light sensitivity.
RMDA was assessed with the AdaptDx (MacuLogix, Harrisburg PA). Testing occurred in a dark, light-tight room after dilation. Dark adaptation was measured with targets at 5° on the superior vertical meridian of the retina, because rod loss is proportionally maximal in aging and AMD at 5°.
10,11 The procedure began with a photo-bleach exposure to a 6° flash centered at the test target location (50 ms duration, 58,000 scotopic cd/m
2 s intensity)
43 while the participant focused on the fixation light at a distance of 30 cm. Threshold measurement (three-down/one-up threshold strategy) for a 2° diameter, 500 nm circular target began 15 seconds after bleach offset. The participant was instructed to maintain fixation and press a button when the flashing target first became visible. Log thresholds were expressed as sensitivity in decibel units as a function of time since bleach offset. Threshold measurement continued at 30-second intervals until the rod intercept time (RIT) was reached. The RIT is the duration in minutes required for sensitivity to recover to a criterion value of 5.0 × 10
−3 scotopic cd/m
2,
22,44 located in the latter one-half of the second component of rod-mediated recovery.
26,45 If the RIT was not reached, the threshold measurement procedure stopped at 45 minutes. Participants with fixation errors of more than 30% were excluded from the analysis.