VIDEO: Better visual acuity endpoints may increase earlier diagnosis of AMD

Editor’s note: This is an automatically generated transcript, which has been slightly edited for clarity. Please notify editor@healio.com if there are concerns regarding accuracy of the transcription.

In ophthalmology in general, the best corrected visual acuity is a very common metric that we use to assess a patient both in regular clinical care and in clinical trial. Of course, if a patient has advanced dry AMD such as geographic atrophy or wet AMD, the visual acuity will be affected. However, the vast majority of patients with AMD have the early or the intermediate form or stage of AMD, and if we just measure the best corrected visual acuity of these patients, oftentimes, that metric could be normal, 20/20. However, it does not mean that the visual quality of these patients is perfectly normal. In fact, it’s very common for these patients to have a variety of visual difficulty despite having a normal visual acuity of 20/20. When we measure these patients in the clinic, specifically these patients with issues with contrast sensitivity, they will probably find it very difficult to operate in a slightly dimmer environment, and reading is oftentimes an issue for these patients as well. What this means is that in the field of AMD, we need better endpoints other than best corrected visual acuity to really monitor and quantify the visual function of these patients.