Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology最新文献

Purpose

To determine the correlation of Fitzpatrick Skin Type (FST) and iris color with tumor size (tumor thickness and basal diameter) in patients with uveal melanoma.

Design

Retrospective Cohort

Methods

Retrospective cohort from a single ocular oncology center of 823 patients with uveal melanoma and documented FST, iris color, and tumor size. Patients were classified by FST (type I, II, and III–V) and iris color (blue, green, and brown) on the basis of external facial photography. There were no FST type VI patients. Tumor thickness was classified into small [< 3 millimeter (mm)], medium (3.1–8.0 mm), or large (> 8.0 mm), and basal diameter into small (< 10 mm), medium (10.1–15 mm) or large (> 15 mm). The correlation of FST and iris color with tumor thickness and basal diameter was evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis H test.

Results

The FST classification was type I (n = 92, 11%), type II (n = 643, 78%), or III–V (n = 88, 11%), and iris color was blue (n = 472, 57%), green (n = 102, 12%), or brown (n = 249, 30%). A comparison of FST revealed differences in mean tumor thickness (P = 0.04) and basal diameter (P = 0.006). Iris color showed no difference for mean tumor thickness (P = 0.41) or basal diameter (P = 0.48). There was a statistically significant difference with brown iris color relative to FST III–V for mean tumor thickness (P = 0.003) and basal diameter (P = 0.001) but no difference with blue or green iris color (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Iris color alone showed no difference in tumor size, but those with brown iris color and FST type III–V demonstrated larger tumor thickness and basal diameter.

Uveal Melanoma (UM) is a rare disease, yet it is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adult patients. Despite continuous advancements and research, the risk of metastasis remains high. It is possible to stratify patients according to their risk of metastases using a variety of known risk factors. Even though there is no gold standard for the prognostication of patients with uveal melanoma, it is becoming increasingly clear that combining histo-pathological, patient-related and molecular prognostic markers allows a more accurate prediction of the metastatic risk than by using one parameter. Primary UM in the eye are treated very effectively with eye-sparing radiation-based techniques or enucleation. However, it is not yet possible to prevent or treat metastases with the current therapeutic options. Nonetheless, the efforts to find new therapeutic targets continue and progress is being made, especially in the field of targeted therapy, as exemplified by the anti-gp100 bispecific molecule Tebentafusp. This review delves into the history of uveal melanoma, its incidence, presentation and diagnosis, the known prognostic factors and the treatment options, both for the primary tumour and for metastases. We show that different populations may have different risks for developing UM, and that each country should evaluate their own patients.

Retinoblastoma, the primary ocular malignancy in pediatric patients, poses a substantial threat to mortality without prompt and effective management. The prognosis for survival and preservation of visual acuity hinges upon the disease severity at the time of initial diagnosis. Notably, retinoblastoma has played a crucial role in unraveling the genetic foundations of oncogenesis. The process of tumorigenesis commonly begins with the occurrence of biallelic mutation in the RB1 tumor suppressor gene, which is then followed by a cascade of genetic and epigenetic alterations that correspond to the clinical stage and pathological features of the tumor. The RB1 gene, recognized as a tumor suppressor, encodes the retinoblastoma protein, which plays a vital role in governing cellular replication through interactions with E2F transcription factors and chromatin remodeling proteins. The diagnosis and treatment of retinoblastoma necessitate consideration of numerous factors, including disease staging, germline mutation status, family psychosocial factors, and the resources available within the institution. This review has systematically compiled and categorized the latest developments in the diagnosis and treatment of retinoblastoma which enhanced the quality of care for this pediatric malignancy.

Masquerade syndromes in uveitis are complex clinical conditions where non-inflammatory diseases mimic uveitic manifestations, often leading to diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. This review delves into the diverse spectrum of masquerade syndromes, categorizing them into neoplastic and non-neoplastic entities. We explore the prevalence of primary intraocular lymphoma, leukaemia, retinoblastoma, and other malignancies, as well as conditions like retinitis pigmentosa and endophthalmitis that can present as uveitis. Through detailed analysis of symptoms, diagnostic methods, and treatment approaches, the review emphasizes the importance of considering masquerade syndromes in differential diagnoses to prevent mismanagement. The synthesis of current knowledge aims to enhance clinicians' ability to discern these complex presentations, advocating for a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis and care, thereby improving patient outcomes in cases of uveitic masquerade syndromes.

Retinoblastoma stands as a paradigm of success in treating malignancies among pediatric patients. Over recent decades, the approach to managing retinoblastoma has evolved significantly, transitioning from the preservation of patients' lives to the preservation of eyes and vision while minimizing treatment-related complications. Chemotherapy, administered through diverse routes, has solidified its role as the cornerstone of retinoblastoma treatment. In addition to intravenous chemotherapy (IVC), alternative administration routes, including intraarterial (IAC), intravitreal, intracameral, and periocular delivery, have emerged as promising modalities for retinoblastoma management. Numerous studies have demonstrated outstanding outcomes, achieving nearly 100% salvage rates for eyes classified under groups A–C. However, for advanced intraocular retinoblastoma (groups D and E eyes), IAC appears to offer superior local control rates compared to IVC. Intravitreal injection of chemotherapeutic agents, when administered in a controlled and secure manner, holds promise in averting the need for enucleation and radiotherapy in advanced retinoblastoma cases presenting with vitreous seeds. The optimal chemotherapy strategy remains meticulously tailored based on numerous factors. This review provides a comprehensive update on chemotherapy across various routes, encompassing key considerations, dosages, administration methods, treatment outcomes, and potential complications. Furthermore, it explores emerging potential treatments and outlines future directions aimed at enhancing treatment outcomes.

Importance

Ocular surface squamous neoplasia (OSSN) is a spectrum of malignancies that generally includes conjunctival intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). OSSN can be treated with topical therapies including interferon α-2b (IFN), mitomycin C (MMC), or 5-fluorouracil 1% (5FU). Recently, due to unavailability of IFN and toxicity associated with MMC, therapy has shifted towards 5FU.

Objective

Herein, we compare the use of 5FU 1% as a primary versus (vs) secondary treatment regimen in eyes with moderate to extensive OSSN.

Design Setting and Participants

Retrospective cohort study of 73 consecutive patients with unilateral moderate to extensive OSSN treated at a single tertiary ocular oncology center from 2016 to 2023. Mean follow up time was 478.2 days overall, with 283.0 days for primary 5FU group and 860.3 days for secondary 5FU group.

Intervention

Topical 5FU 1% 4 times daily for 2 weeks with option for 2-weekly extension until tumor control, either as primary treatment or as secondary treatment to surgical resection, topical IFN or topical MMC, or cryotherapy.

Main Outcomes

Outcome measures included tumor response, need for additional surgery, complications, and visual outcomes.

Results

A comparison (primary vs secondary treatment) revealed no difference in mean tumor basal dimension (19.6 vs 17.2 mm, P = 0.46), thickness (3.7 vs 3.4 mm, P = 0.64), or tumor extent (4.4 vs 4.5 clock hours, P = 0.92). The primary treatment group showed greater complete tumor control (77% vs 38%, P = 0.04). Multivariable analysis comparison (primary vs secondary treatment) showed primary treatment more likely to achieve complete tumor control (P = 0.01). There was no difference in the complication rate from 5FU treatment between the groups. There was no difference in visual outcome, and no tumor-related metastasis (0%) or death (0%).

Conclusion and Relevance

Topical 5FU 1% is efficacious and safe as a primary or secondary treatment for moderate to extensive OSSN. Tumors treated with primary 5FU 1% demonstrated more complete resolution. In patients with moderate to extensive OSSN, primary treatment with topical 5FU 1% may be warranted.