Discussion
In this cross-sectional, consecutive, unicentric study, we performed a qualitative analysis comparing the conventional structural (SD-OCT and FAF) and functional (VF and mfERG) tests with the addition of novel techniques (en face OCT and en face OCTA) to evaluate the best complementary approach to detect subclinical retinal toxicity. Unlike most studies analysing tests to detect hydroxychloroquine-induced retinal toxicity in patients with SLE,29 30 our study focused on individuals who were less likely to experience retinal toxicity, as most patients (84.85%) had a cumulative dose of hydroxychloroquine of less than 1000 g. In our study, the incidence of hydroxychloroquine-induced retinal toxicity was 3.88 cases per 100 persons per year.
Our series of patients with hydroxychloroquine retinopathy showed changes in both structural and functional tests. All patients with hydroxychloroquine retinal toxicity had perifoveal ellipsoid zone defects, as seen on cross-sectional OCT B-scan images, with uneven reflectivity on en face OCT and OCTA, which was confirmed with mfERG alterations.
In our study, the structural tests, en face OCT and en face OCTA, showed a high sensitivity for detecting macular photoreceptor layer alterations, which were confirmed or rejected by mfERG and FAF, which proved to be more specific. On the other hand, the AAO recommends FAF as a structural and objective test for the screening of hydroxychloroquine retinopathy, especially in cases of reduced VF, as it may provide additional information for the diagnosis and monitoring of hydroxychloroquine retinopathy.10 Throughout our study, FAF results changed simultaneously with mfERG, but did not show more sensitivity than en face OCT and en face OCTA.
Regarding quantitative macular measurements, we have recently reported the differences between patients with SLE and controls in SD-OCT and OCTA parameters.9 Patients with SLE showed significant thinning of the central macular thickness and retinal nerve fibre layer thickness compared with healthy controls. Furthermore, patients with SLE had significantly decreased vascular density and vascular perfusion when compared with controls, while the area of the foveal avascular zone did not differ between them.9 In the present analysis, all quantitative results from SD-OCT and OCTA showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups of hydroxychloroquine duration for any of the parameters analysed. However, three patients with hydroxychloroquine retinopathy had macular thickness measurements that were lower than the mean for the entire series. Because macular thickness can vary widely between individuals and can be influenced by several factors,31 further research is needed to assess the sensitivity of SD-OCT compared with VF or mfERG, as prominent changes are sometimes observed on SD-OCT even before VF loss is detected.11 32
Regarding functional tests, although many patients with SLE treated with hydroxychloroquine showed changes in VF, the specificity of VF for detecting early retinal toxicity in our study was only 47.5%, making it an unreliable standalone test for detecting macular toxicity. Patient cooperation and response and the need to repeat the test for reproducibility further limit its usefulness in detecting macular toxicity.33
Although mfERG is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of macular toxicity,25 27 the diagnosis of macular toxicity should be made in combination with altered structural tests; nevertheless, the mfERG is very helpful in confirming hydroxychloroquine toxicity in controversial cases. The high concordance of mfERG with the other tests was significant, especially with en face OCT, en face OCTA and FAF, as 100% of the cases diagnosed by mfERG had abnormalities in the other tests. Therefore, a multimodal approach combining several objective tests, including mfERG, and structural tests, such as en face OCT and en face OCTA, may be helpful in detecting subclinical macular toxicity in patients with SLE receiving hydroxychloroquine (figure 3).
Figure 3Multimodal assessment of hydroxychloroquine-induced retinal toxicity. Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) en face sections (en face OCT) at ellipsoid level showed central and parafoveal changes in both eyes, with typical ‘bull’s eye’ macular appearance. Fundus autofluorescence (FAF) revealed a hypoautofluorescent semi-circular lesion in the temporal parafoveal region in both eyes. Functional perimetry with a 10.2 central visual field (VF 10.2) revealed localised paracentral scotomas (RE) and diffuse peripheral sensitivity loss (RE and LE), but with preserved central function. The multifocal electroretinogram (mERG) was the most sensitive approach, showing a diffuse decrease in P1-wave amplitudes, more evident in the peripheral isoptera of both eyes (blue hexagons), and more pronounced in the LE. LE, left eye; RE, right eye.
Definitions of hydroxychloroquine-induced retinal toxicity vary due to the use of different diagnostic techniques such as OCT and FAF, and the lack of objective assessment tools in previous studies. Modern imaging allows for more objective classification of retinopathy by severity and pattern, but variations in the interpretation of these tests still contribute to inconsistencies in toxicity definitions.34 Allahdina et al proposed a new staging system based on OCT findings: stage 1 includes minor changes limited to the parafoveal region; stage 2 includes clear localised changes in the parafoveal region; stage 3 includes extensive parafoveal changes; and stage 4 includes foveal involvement. While this system is primarily applicable to eyes with parafoveal retinopathy, these stages have been functionally related to visual acuity, visual field test results or mfERG and are significantly associated with the degree of further progression.35 In our study, all patients were diagnosed at stage 1, leading to improvements in CV and reversals in mfERG findings during follow-up.
In line with our findings, a recent study compared the use of en face OCT and mfERG for screening hydroxychloroquine retinopathy. The study shows that although there is some agreement between the two methods, they cannot replace each other as they assess different retinal changes. The results suggest that en face OCT could serve as an additional tool in screening, but requires confirmation by OCT B-scan for accurate diagnosis.29
The current study has several limitations, including a small number of patients with hydroxychloroquine toxicity and limited power owing to the low incidence of retinal toxicity. We may have overestimated true adherence to hydroxychloroquine given the absence of a reliable technique to measure blood levels in patients with SLE. In addition, the lack of a control group did not ensure that some abnormalities observed could also occur in healthy individuals. One of the main strengths of this study was the inclusion of only incidental cases diagnosed within the 15-month study period, which allows the comparison of different diagnostic procedures, in contrast to other reports that included prevalent cases. Finally, despite the modest size of the study, the en face OCT and en face OCTA techniques allowed the acquisition of the largest unicentric collection of structural and microvascular retinal data in patients with SLE to date, as we have recently published.9
In conclusion, this study highlights the importance of using a combination of functional and structural retinal assessment tools to detect the subclinical features of hydroxychloroquine-induced maculopathy. In our study, mfERG was more sensitive and specific than VF in detecting subclinical toxicity, and in conjunction with en face OCT and en face OCTA, which showed a high concordance with mfERG, are also useful in detecting subclinical structural abnormalities in patients with SLE. This study provides valuable insights into the multimodal imaging of hydroxychloroquine-induced retinal toxicity and may contribute to the development of improved screening methods. Although further studies are needed to directly compare their utility in subclinical hydroxychloroquine-induced retinopathy, new retinal imaging techniques such as en face OCT and en face OCTA offer a promising way to detect the extent of retinopathy from a single image. As a result of the study, an algorithm for monitoring retinal impact in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine is proposed (figure 4).
Figure 4Suggested algorithm for monitoring retinal impact of hydroxychloroquine. eGRF, estimated glomerular rate filtrate; FAF, fundus autofluorescence; HCQ, hydroxychloroquine; mfERG, multifocal electroretinography; OCT, optical coherence tomography; OCTA, optical coherence tomography angiography; VF, visual field.