Quetiapine in anorexia nervosa patients: an open label outpatient pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: The main objective of the study was to determine whether quetiapine was effective in reducing scores on the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) in anorexia nervosa (AN) patients. Secondary objectives included determining whether quetiapine was effective in reducing symptoms of anxiety and depression. In addition, the effect on weight was determined. METHOD: In an open label design, 19 patients with AN but without schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were given 150-300 mg quetiapine daily over a 10 week period. Results were analyzed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). RESULTS: Fourteen patients completed the study and all but one of the 5 patients who dropped out returned for an early termination visit. Scores on the total, general psychopathology, and depression scales of the PANSS declined significantly (p = .024, .010, .0005, respectively) at LOCF. There were improvements in several measures of anxiety, depression, and obsessive compulsive symptoms. Mean weight gain was modest at 1.6 lbs (0.73 kg). Adverse events were generally mild and no patients discontinued due to adverse events CONCLUSION: Quetiapine was well-tolerated and patients had significant improvements in several subscales of the PANSS as well as decreases in measures of anxiety and depression.

Glaucomatous visual field progression with frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in a longitudinal prospective study.

PURPOSE: To compare frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry with standard automated perimetry (SAP) for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression in a longitudinal prospective study. METHODS: One eye of patients with open-angle glaucoma was tested every 6 months with both FDT and SAP. A minimum of 6 examinations with each perimetric technique was required for inclusion. Visual field progression was determined by two methods: glaucoma change probability (GCP) analysis and linear regression analysis (LRA). For GCP, several criteria for progression were used. The number of locations required to classify progression with FDT compared with SAP, respectively, was 1:2 (least conservative), 1:3, 2:3, 2:4, 2:6, 2:7, 3:6, 3:7, and 3:10 (most conservative). The number of consecutive examinations required to confirm progression was 2-of-3, 2-of-2, and 3-of-3. For LRA, the progression criterion was any significant decline in mean threshold sensitivity over time in each of the following three visual field subdivisions: (1) all test locations, (2) locations in the central 10 degrees and the superior and inferior hemifields, and (3) locations in each quadrant. Using these criteria, the proportion of patients classified as showing progression with each perimetric technique was calculated and, in the case of progression with both, the differences in time to progression were determined. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were followed for a median of 3.5 years (median number of examinations, 9). For the least conservative GCP criterion, 32 (49%) patients were found to have progressing visual fields with FDT and 32 (49%) patients with SAP. Only 16 (25%) patients showed progression with both methods, and in most of those patients, FDT identified progression before SAP (median, 12 months earlier). The majority of GCP progression criteria (15/27), classified more patients as showing progression with FDT than with SAP. Contrary to this, more patients showed progression with SAP than FDT, when analysed with LRA; e.g., using quadrant LRA 20 (31%) patients showed progression with FDT, 23 (35%) with SAP, and only 10 (15%) with both. CONCLUSIONS: FDT perimetry detected glaucomatous visual field progression. However, the proportion of patients who showed progression with both FDT and SAP was small, possibly indicating that the two techniques identify different subgroups of patients. Using GCP, more patients showed progression with FDT than with SAP, yet the opposite occurred using LRA. As there is no independent qualifier of progression, FDT and SAP progression rates vary depending on the method of analysis and the criterion used.

Visual field and optic disc progression in patients with different types of optic disc damage: a longitudinal prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of visual field and optic disc progression in glaucoma patients with distinct patterns of optic disc damage. DESIGN: Prospective, observational case series. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred five patients with open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: Baseline optic disc photographs of 105 study eyes of 105 patients were reviewed by 2 masked observers and classified according to patterns of disc damage into the following categories: focal, myopic, senile sclerotic, and generalized disc damage. Patients were followed up every 6 months with standard automated perimetry (SAP), high-pass resolution perimetry (HRP), and scanning laser tomography (SLT) with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual field (SAP and HRP) and optic disc (SLT) progression were determined according to predefined criteria. RESULTS: Twenty-four eyes were classified into the focal, 8 into the myopic, 12 into the senile sclerotic, and 28 into the generalized group. Eyes from 33 patients could not be classified by the observers into any of these groups and were excluded from further analysis. Although intraocular pressure during follow-up was similar among the four groups, some differences in frequency of progression were observed. Patients with senile sclerotic discs had the lowest rates of visual field progression (both with SAP and HRP) and optic disc progression, although the differences were significant only for optic disc progression (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with senile sclerotic discs showed a tendency towards less visual field and optic disc progression when compared with patients with other types of disc damage.

Retinal arterial diameter changes in progressive and nonprogressive glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To determine if the degree of retinal arterial diameter change is different between patients with progressive and nonprogressive open-angle glaucoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 44 eyes of 44 open-angle glaucoma patients (mean age, 67.5 years; age range, 52-84 years; mean follow-up period, 4.9 years; follow-up range, 1.3-7.5 years) were included. The change in arterial diameter between the baseline and the most recent follow-up optic disc photograph was determined. The diameter of the 4 major arteries was measured at the optic disc margin and at the thinnest and broadest locations within 1 optic disc diameter from the disc margin. Patients were stratified into progressing and nonprogressing groups according to visual field and optic disc criteria. RESULTS: Visual field progression was observed in 13 (30%) patients and optic disc progression in 24 (55%) patients. On average, the arterial diameters at the edge of the optic disc decreased significantly by 2.37% (95% CI, -3.31% to -1.41%) per year of follow-up (P<0.001). No significant difference in generalized or focal arterial narrowing was observed between progressive and nonprogressive groups regardless of the criterion used (P>0.462). With this sample, the power to detect a 10% difference in arterial narrowing between the 2 groups was 66%. There was no relationship between the rates of visual field progression and arterial diameter change in the whole group (P = 0.171) or in groups segregated into progressing and nonprogressing patients (P>0.104). CONCLUSION: Arterial diameters decreased in both progressive and nonprogressive glaucoma. In this study, there was little evidence that arterial narrowing was more pronounced in progressive disease.

Comparison of data analysis tools for detection of glaucoma with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance of three linear discriminant functions (LDFs) and the Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) in classifying optic disc topography images obtained with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) from patients with open-angle glaucoma and normal controls. Furthermore, to investigate whether the classification of glaucomatous eyes is related to the severity of visual field loss or to optic disc size. DESIGN: Prospective comparative observational case series. PARTICIPANTS: One eye of 104 patients with a diagnosis of open-angle glaucoma (mean age, 63.2; range, 30-88 years) and 48 normal controls (mean age, 52.4; range, 33-75 years). TESTING: Subjects were examined with the HRT. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic performance was calculated for the LDFs published by Mikelberg et al (LDF1), Burk (LDF2), and Bathija et al (LDF3) and for the MRA. RESULTS: Large differences in sensitivity and specificity were found among the different analyses when using the originally suggested cutoff criteria. When specificity was equalized to 90%, the sensitivities were more similar (LDF1, 55%; LDF2, 61%; and LDF3, 67%). At 95% specificity, the sensitivities decreased further (LDF1, 39%; LDF2, 55%; LDF3, 44%). When treating the "borderline" outcomes as test positives, MRA sensitivity and specificity were 78% and 81%, respectively. When treating the "borderline" outcomes as test negatives, the MRA gave a sensitivity of 58%, with a specificity of 96%. In glaucoma patients, the correlation between the severity of visual field damage, as measured by the mean deviation index, and the outcome of the classification systems was low to moderate (Spearman's r between 0.26 and 0.39). When the entire sample was stratified into equal thirds on the basis of optic disc size, large discs (area > 2.10 mm(2)) tended to be classified with a higher sensitivity but lower specificity than small discs (area < 1.73 mm(2)) with all methods except LDF3. Using a multiple regression model controlling for mean deviation, LDF1, and LDF2, but not LDF3, were significantly influenced by disc size. CONCLUSIONS: The 4 methods of analysis had similar sensitivities once their specificities were equalized. In this sample, the LDFs and MRA generally did not discriminate between glaucoma patients and controls as well as reported in the original respective studies that described the methods.

Effects of blur and repeated testing on sensitivity estimates with frequency doubling perimetry.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of blur and repeated testing on sensitivity with frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry. METHODS: One eye of 12 patients with glaucoma (mean deviation [MD] mean, -2.5 dB, range +0.5 to -4.3 dB) and 11 normal control subjects underwent six consecutive tests with the FDT N30 threshold program in each of two sessions. In session 1, blur was induced by trial lenses (-6.00, -3.00, 0.00, +3.00, and +6.00 D, in random order). In session 2, only the effects of repeated testing were evaluated. The MD and pattern standard deviation (PSD) indices were evaluated as functions of blur and of test order. By correcting the data of session 1 for the reduction of sensitivity with repeated testing (session 2), the effect of blur on FDT sensitivities was established, and its clinical consequences evaluated on total- and pattern-deviation probability maps. RESULTS: FDT sensitivities decreased with blur (by <0.5 dB/D) and with repeated testing (by approximately 2 dB between the first and sixth tests). Blur and repeated testing independently led to larger numbers of locations with significant total and pattern deviation. Sensitivity reductions were similar in normal control subjects and patients with glaucoma, at central and peripheral test locations and at locations with high and low sensitivities. However, patients with glaucoma showed larger deterioration in the total-deviation-probability maps. CONCLUSIONS: To optimize the performance of the device, refractive errors should be corrected and immediate retesting avoided. Further research is needed to establish the cause of sensitivity loss with repeated FDT testing.