Ultra-Widefield and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study 7-Field Grading of Diabetic Retinopathy

Abstract

High concordance in diabetic retinopathy (DR) outcomes between 7-field (7F) and ultra-widefield (UWF) images would allow for combining longitudinal assessments based on the 2 modalities both in clinical studies and clinical care. To compare 7F and UWF imaging with regard to DR severity and the associations of DR severity with risk factors, such as hemoglobin A1c, age, diabetes duration, and sex. This cross-sectional study describes the outcomes of the randomized clinical Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) and its subsequent observational study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. Of the 1441 participants with type 1 diabetes in the DCCT, 1375 were enrolled in the EDIC study. Of the 1171 participants who were active between March 2019 and December 2021, 200° UWF color imaging and 7F fundus photographs were obtained for 785 participants once at the same visit. Central graders assessed 7F-UWF with a 7F template masking the retinal periphery and the full UWF image (UWF-global). Data were analyzed from January 2022 to March 2023. Hemoglobin A1c was assessed quarterly during the DCCT and annually during the EDIC study using high-performance liquid chromatography. Retinopathy was determined independently for all imaging as mild, moderate, or severe nonproliferative DR (SNPDR) using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) grading scale for the 7F images and the global ETDRS grading scale for the UWF images. Panretinal and focal photocoagulation were self-reported or based on scarring location and pattern observed during grading. Proliferative DR (PDR) was defined by observed neovascularization or evidence of panretinal photocoagulation. Among the 785 participants included in this study, 420 (53%) were male and 365 (47%) were female. The mean (SD) age was 61 (7) years. DR grading between UWF-7F and 7F imaging was correlated for all outcomes, including for severe outcomes, such as SNPDR (κ, 0.73; concordance, 96%), PDR (κ, 0.74; concordance, 97%), scatter photocoagulation (κ, 0.97; concordance, 99%), and focal photocoagulation (κ, 0.71; concordance, 98%). Most DR severity scores were within 1 step (1410 of 1529 [92%]), and 3% (51 of 1529) were more than 2 steps apart (κ, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.42-0.49; weighted κ, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.60-0.67) on the ETDRS severity scale. DR severity assessed within the UWF-global area was higher compared to 7F (median [IQR] UWF-global score, 3 [2-3] vs median 7F level score, 2.0 [1-3]; P < .001), although the 2 modalities were correlated (1225 of 1508 [81%] 1-step agreement; weighted κ, 0.41). Standard ETDRS 7F and UWF evaluations of DR were comparable for ETDRS severity levels as previously reported by Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Retina Network reports. In addition, these evaluations of DR were comparable for DCCT/EDIT study outcomes and major study conclusions, suggesting that use of UWF imaging is not likely to introduce relevant measurement biases in future longitudinal studies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00360815.