Pupil and masking responses to light as functional measures of retinal degeneration in mice Mus Musculus

<p><b>Background: </b>Pre-clinical testing of retinal pathology and treatment efficacy depends on reliable and valid measures of retinal function. The electroretinogram (ERG) and tests of visual acuity are the ideal standard, but can be unmeasurable while useful vision remains. Non-image-forming responses to light such as the pupillary light reflex (PLR) are attractive surrogates. However, it is not clear how accurately such responses reflect changes in visual capability in specific disease models. The purpose of this study was to test whether measures of non-visual responses to light correlate with previously determined visual function in two photoreceptor degenerations.</p> <p><b>Methods: </b>The sensitivity of masking behavior (light induced changes in running wheel activity) and the PLR were measured in 3-month-old wild-type mice (WT) with intact inner retinal circuitry, <i>Pde6b</i>-<i>rd1/rd1 </i>mice (<i>rd1</i>) with early and rapid loss of rods and cones, and <i>Prph2-Rd2/Rd2</i> mice (<i>Rd2</i>) with slowly progressing loss of rods and cones.</p> <p><b>Results: </b>In <i>rd1</i> mice, negative masking had increased sensitivity, positive masking was absent, and the sensitivity of the PLR was severely reduced. In <i>Rd2</i> mice, positive masking identified useful vision at higher light levels, but there was a limited decrease in the irradiance sensitivity of negative masking and the PLR, and the amplitude of change for both underestimated the reduction in irradiance sensitivity of image-forming vision.</p> <p><b>Conclusions: </b>Together these data show that in a given disease, two responses to light can be affected in opposite ways, and that for a given response to light, the change in the response does not accurately represent the degree of pathology. However, the extent of the deficit in the PLR means that even a limited rescue of rod/cone function might be measured by increased PLR amplitude. In addition, positive masking has the potential to measure effective treatment in both models by restoring responses or shifting thresholds to lower irradiances.</p>