Refractive error is the most common eye disorder worldwide, and a prominent cause of blindness. Myopia affects over 30% of Western populations, and up to 80% of Asians. The CREAM consortium conducted genome-wide meta-analyses including 37,382 individuals from 27 studies of European ancestry, and 8,376 from 5 Asian cohorts. We identified 16 new loci for refractive error in subjects of European ancestry, of which 8 were shared with Asians. Combined analysis revealed 8 additional loci. The new loci include genes with functions in neurotransmission (GRIA4), ion channels (KCNQ5), retinoic acid metabolism (RDH5), extracellular matrix remodeling (LAMA2, BMP2), and eye development (SIX6, PRSS56). We also confirmed previously reported associations with GJD2 and RASGRF1. Risk score analysis using associated SNPs showed a tenfold increased risk of myopia for subjects with the highest genetic load. Our results, accumulated across independent multi-ethnic studies, considerably advance understanding of mechanisms involved in refractive error and myopia.
PurposeWe provide a standardized set of terminology, definitions, and thresholds of myopia and its main ocular complications.MethodsCritical review of current terminology and choice of myopia thresholds was done to ensure that the proposed standards are appropriate for clinical research purposes, relevant to the underlying biology of myopia, acceptable to researchers in the field, and useful for developing health policy.ResultsWe recommend that the many descriptive terms of myopia be consolidated into the following descriptive categories: myopia, secondary myopia, axial myopia, and refractive myopia. To provide a framework for research into myopia prevention, the condition of “pre-myopia” is defined. As a quantitative trait, we recommend that myopia be divided into myopia (i.e., all myopia), low myopia, and high myopia. The current consensus threshold value for myopia is a spherical equivalent refractive error ≤ −0.50 diopters (D), but this carries significant risks of classification bias. The current consensus threshold value for high myopia is a spherical equivalent refractive error ≤ −6.00 D. “Pathologic myopia” is proposed as the categorical term for the adverse, structural complications of myopia. A clinical classification is proposed to encompass the scope of such structural complications.ConclusionsStandardized definitions and consistent choice of thresholds are essential elements of evidence-based medicine. It is hoped that these proposals, or derivations from them, will facilitate rigorous, evidence-based approaches to the study and management of myopia.
To estimate the prevalence of refractive error in adults across Europe. Refractive data (mean spherical equivalent) collected between 1990 and 2013 from fifteen population-based cohort and cross-sectional studies of the European Eye Epidemiology (E3) Consortium were combined in a random effects meta-analysis stratified by 5-year age intervals and gender. Participants were excluded if they were identified as having had cataract surgery, retinal detachment, refractive surgery or other factors that might influence refraction. Estimates of refractive error prevalence were obtained including the following classifications: myopia ≤−0.75 diopters (D), high myopia ≤−6D, hyperopia ≥1D and astigmatism ≥1D. Meta-analysis of refractive error was performed for 61,946 individuals from fifteen studies with median age ranging from 44 to 81 and minimal ethnic variation (98 % European ancestry). The age-standardised prevalences (using the 2010 European Standard Population, limited to those ≥25 and <90 years old) were: myopia 30.6 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 30.4–30.9], high myopia 2.7 % (95 % CI 2.69–2.73), hyperopia 25.2 % (95 % CI 25.0–25.4) and astigmatism 23.9 % (95 % CI 23.7–24.1). Age-specific estimates revealed a high prevalence of myopia in younger participants [47.2 % (CI 41.8–52.5) in 25–29 years-olds]. Refractive error affects just over a half of European adults. The greatest burden of refractive error is due to myopia, with high prevalence rates in young adults. Using the 2010 European population estimates, we estimate there are 227.2 million people with myopia across Europe. Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10654-015-0010-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
PurposeTo investigate whether myopia is becoming more common across Europe and explore whether increasing education levels, an important environmental risk factor for myopia, might explain any temporal trend.DesignMeta-analysis of population-based, cross-sectional studies from the European Eye Epidemiology (E3) Consortium.ParticipantsThe E3 Consortium is a collaborative network of epidemiological studies of common eye diseases in adults across Europe. Refractive data were available for 61 946 participants from 15 population-based studies performed between 1990 and 2013; participants had a range of median ages from 44 to 78 years.MethodsNoncycloplegic refraction, year of birth, and highest educational level achieved were obtained for all participants. Myopia was defined as a mean spherical equivalent ≤−0.75 diopters. A random-effects meta-analysis of age-specific myopia prevalence was performed, with sequential analyses stratified by year of birth and highest level of educational attainment.Main Outcome MeasuresVariation in age-specific myopia prevalence for differing years of birth and educational level.ResultsThere was a significant cohort effect for increasing myopia prevalence across more recent birth decades; age-standardized myopia prevalence increased from 17.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.6–18.1) to 23.5% (95% CI, 23.2–23.7) in those born between 1910 and 1939 compared with 1940 and 1979 (P = 0.03). Education was significantly associated with myopia; for those completing primary, secondary, and higher education, the age-standardized prevalences were 25.4% (CI, 25.0–25.8), 29.1% (CI, 28.8–29.5), and 36.6% (CI, 36.1–37.2), respectively. Although more recent birth cohorts were more educated, this did not fully explain the cohort effect. Compared with the reference risk of participants born in the 1920s with only primary education, higher education or being born in the 1960s doubled the myopia prevalence ratio–2.43 (CI, 1.26–4.17) and 2.62 (CI, 1.31–5.00), respectively—whereas individuals born in the 1960s and completing higher education had approximately 4 times the reference risk: a prevalence ratio of 3.76 (CI, 2.21–6.57).ConclusionsMyopia is becoming more common in Europe; although education levels have increased and are associated with myopia, higher education seems to be an additive rather than explanatory factor. Increasing levels of myopia carry significant clinical and economic implications, with more people at risk of the sight-threatening complications associated with high myopia.
Refractive errors, in particular myopia, are a leading cause of morbidity and disability worldwide and their prevalence is rising, largely due to cultural and environmental changes. Genetic investigation is a valuable tool to better understand the molecular mechanisms underlying abnormal eye development and impaired vision. We conducted a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies involving 542,934 European participants and identified 336 novel genetic loci associated with refractive error that explain an additional 4.6% of spherical equivalent heritability, or an improvement by a third over the previous estimates. Collectively, all associated genetic variants explain 18.4% of heritability and improve the accuracy of myopia prediction (AUC=0.75). Our results suggest that refractive error is genetically heterogeneous, driven by genes participating in the development of every anatomical component of the eye. In addition, our analyses suggest that genetic factors controlling circadian rhythm and pigmentation are also involved in the development of myopia and refractive error. These results may make possible predicting refractive error and the development of personalized myopia prevention strategies in the future.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.