Applying “Lasso” regression to predict future visual field progression in glaucoma patients

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 2334-2339

  Fujino, Yuri ^a   Murata, Hiroshi ^a   Mayama, Chihiro ^a   Asaoka, Ryo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Lasso regression; Mean deviation; Progression; Static perimetry; Visual field

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; LASSO REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; PERIMETRY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RELIABILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROBUSTNESS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; VISUAL FIELD PROGRESSION; VISUAL SYSTEM FUNCTION; DISEASE COURSE; FOLLOW UP; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; VISUAL FIELD;

DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 84939644196     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-16445     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Danias J, Podos SM. Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced intraocular pressures. The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;127:623-625.
2. Leske MC, Hyman L, Hussein M, et al. Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced intraocular pressures. The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;127:625-626.
3. Jampel HD. Target pressure in glaucoma therapy. J Glaucoma. 1997;6:133-138.
4. Shields MB. Textbook of Glaucoma. Baltimore, MD: William & Wilkins; 1997.
5. Aihara M, Shirato S, Sakata R. Incidence of deepening of the upper eyelid sulcus after switching from latanoprost to bimatoprost. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2011;55:600-604.
6. Sakata R, Shirato S, Miyata K, et al. Incidence of deepening of the upper eyelid sulcus on treatment with a tafluprost ophthalmic solution. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2014;58:212-217.
7. Yamada Y, Takayanagi R, Tsuchiya K, et al. Assessment of systemic adverse reactions induced by ophthalmic beta-adrenergic receptor antagonists. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2001;17:235-248.
8. Yamamoto T, Sawada A, Mayama C, et al. The 5-year incidence of bleb-related infection and its risk factors after filtering surgeries with adjunctive mitomycin C: collaborative bleb-related infection incidence and treatment study 2. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:1001-1006.
9. Flammer J, Drance SM, Fankhauser F, et al. Differential light threshold in automated static perimetry. Factors influencing short-term fluctuation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:876-879.
10. Flammer J, Drance SM, Zulauf M. Differential light threshold. Shortand long-term fluctuation in patients with glaucoma, normal controls, and patients with suspected glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:704-706.
11. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. False-negative responses in glaucoma perimetry: indicators of patient performance or test reliability? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:2201-2204.
12. Henson DB, Evans J, Chauhan BC, et al. Influence of fixation accuracy on threshold variability in patients with open angle glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:444-450.
13. Krakau CE. A statistical trap in the evaluation of visual field decay. Acta Ophthalmol. 1985;173(2):19-21.
14. Holmin C, Krakau CE. Regression analysis of the central visual field in chronic glaucoma cases. A follow-up study using automatic perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1982;60: 267-274.
15. Spry PG, Bates AB, Johnson CA, et al. Simulation of longitudinal threshold visual field data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:2192-2200.
16. Caprioli J, Mock D, Bitrian E, et al. A method to measure and predict rates of regional visual field decay in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:4765-4773.
17. Bengtsson B, Patella VM, Heijl A. Prediction of glaucomatous visual field loss by extrapolation of linear trends. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127:1610-1615.
18. Russell RA, Crabb DP. On alternative methods for measuring visual field decay: Tobit linear regression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:9539-9540.
19. Zhu H, Russell RA, Saunders LJ, et al. Detecting changes in retinal function: analysis with Non-Stationary Weibull Error Regression and Spatial enhancement (ANSWERS). PLoS One. 2014;9:85654.
20. Murata H, Araie M, Asaoka R. A new approach to measure visual field progression in glaucoma patients using Variational Bayes linear regression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55: 8386-8392.
21. Wilcox R. Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 2011.
22. Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J RStat SocSeries B.1996;58:267-288.
23. Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J Stat Softw. 2010;33:1-22.
24. Barbosa MS, Bubna-Litic A, Maddess T. Locally countable properties and the perceptual salience of textures. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2013;30:1687-1697.
25. Akutekwe A, Seker H. A hybrid dynamic Bayesian network approach for modelling temporal associations of gene expressions for hypertension diagnosis. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med and Biol Soc. 2014;2014:804-807.
26. Asaoka R. Measuring visual field progression in the central 10 degrees using additional information from central 24 degrees visual fields and ‘lasso regression’. PLoS One. 2013;8:e72199.
27. Anderson D. Automated Static Perimetry. St. Louis, MO: C.V. Mosby Co.; 1992.
28. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. False-negative responses in glaucoma perimetry: indicators of patient performance or test reliability? Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:689.
29. Anderson DR, Drance SM, Schulzer M, et al. Natural history of normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:247-253.
30. Araie M. Basic and clinical studies of pressure-independent damaging factors of open angle glaucoma. Nippon Ganka Gakkai zasshi. 2011;115:213-236, discussion 237.
31. Koseki N, Araie M, Tomidokoro A, et al. A placebo-controlled 3-year study of a calcium blocker on visual field and ocular circulation in glaucoma with low-normal pressure. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:2049-2057.
32. Huber PJ. 1972 Wald Memorial Lectures Robust Regression Asymptotics, Conjectures and Monte-Carlo. Ann Stat. 1973;1: 799-821.
33. Yohai VJ. High breakdown-point and high-efficiency robust estimates for regression. Ann Stat. 1987;15:642-656.
34. Theil H. A rank-invariant method of linear and polynomial regression analysis. I, II, III. Nederl Akad Wetensch Proc. 1950; 53, 1397-1412.
35. Rousseeuw PJ, Hubert H. Regression depth. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:388-402.
36. Bai Z, He X. Asymptotic distributions of the maximal depth estimators for regression and multivariate location. Ann Stat. 1999;27:1616-1637.
37. Van Aelst S, Rousseeuw PJ. Robustness of deepest regression. J Multivariate Anal. 2000;73:83-106.
38. Van Aelst S, Rousseeuw PJ, Hubert M, et al. The deepest regression method. J Multivariate Anal. 2002;81:138-166.
39. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Stat Soc Series B. 1995;57:289-300.
40. Jansonius NM. On the accuracy of measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2010;94:1404-1405.
41. Artes PH, Iwase A, Ohno Y, et al. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:2654-2659.
42. Liang ZH, Tomioka R, Murata H, et al. Quantitative prediction of visual field loss due to glaucoma from few measurements. Proc IEEE Int Conf Data Mining (ICDM2013). 2013;1121-1126.
43. Sample PA, Chan K, Boden C, et al. Using unsupervised learning with variational bayesian mixture of factor analysis to identify patterns of glaucomatous visual field defects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:2596-2605.
44. Goldbaum MH, Lee I, Jang G, et al. Progression of patterns (POP): a machine classifier algorithm to identify glaucoma progression in visual fields. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012; 53:6557-6567.
45. Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, et al. Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996; 80:40-48.
46. Viswanathan AC, Crabb DP, McNaught AI, et al. Interobserver agreement on visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of methods. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:726-730