Early changes in ocular biometry predict long-term treatment outcomes following repeated low-level red-light therapy
Zhou K, Ma X, Shen D, Zhao J, Sun X, Wei W
Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy · 1 citation
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Cohort study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2026-02-26 · Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther · vol. 58 · p. 105414
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Cited
- 1 citation · more than 93% of similar papers · 5.5× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 42 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Research areas
- Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies · Retinopathy of Prematurity Studies · Corneal surgery and disorders
- Keywords
- Clinical Practice, Baseline (sea), Clinical trial, Eye disease, MEDLINE
- MeSH
- humans, myopia, prognosis, treatment outcome, photochemotherapy, retrospective studies, biometry, child, female, male, axial length, eye, red light
6 authors
From CN
- Kun ZhouShanxi Medical University; Microbiology Institute of Shaanxi; Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital
- Xiaohuan MaShanxi Medical University; Microbiology Institute of Shaanxi; Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital
- Di ShenShanxi Medical University; Microbiology Institute of Shaanxi; Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital
- Junhong ZhaoShanxi Medical University; Microbiology Institute of Shaanxi; Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital
- Xiyu Sun · correspondingShanxi Medical University; Microbiology Institute of Shaanxi; Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital
- Wei Wei · correspondingMicrobiology Institute of Shaanxi
Abstract
Purpose
Repeated low-level red-light (RLRL) therapy has emerged as a promising intervention for pediatric myopia control. However, substantial inter-individual variability in treatment response limits its clinical applicability. Reliable tools for early identification of long-term responders remain limited. This study aimed to develop a prognostic model based on early axial length (AL) dynamics to predict long-term myopia control outcomes in children undergoing RLRL therapy.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included myopic children treated with RLRL therapy at Xi'an No.1 Hospital between August 2022 and December 2025. Participants were classified into good- and poor-prognosis groups based on yearly AL change (≤ -0.06 vs. > -0.06 mm/year). Demographic characteristics, baseline spherical equivalent (SE), subfoveal choroidal thickness (sChT), and ocular biometric parameters at baseline and at 1 and 3 months post-treatment were collected. Univariable logistic regression was used to screen potential predictors, and nomograms were constructed for prognostic modeling.
Results
A total of 69 children were enrolled (35 good-prognosis, 34 poor-prognosis). Significant differences were observed in baseline SE, AL, 1-month AL change, 3-month AL change, and the AL change rate over the first 3 months (all P < 0.05). The nomogram incorporating age, sex, and 3-month AL change showed the highest predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.961. No serious adverse events were observed during follow-up.
Conclusions
RLRL therapy is effective and safe for controlling myopia progression in children. Early AL dynamics, combined with baseline ocular parameters, provide strong predictive power for long-term outcomes, supporting individualized myopia management and risk-stratified clinical decision-making.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY-NC-ND).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.