PURPOSE: We present and evaluate a new automated method based on support vector machine (SVM) classification of whole-brain anatomical magnetic resonance imaging to discriminate between patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and elderly control subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 16 patients with AD [mean age +/- standard deviation (SD) = 74.1 +/- 5.2 years, mini-mental score examination (MMSE) = 23.1 +/- 2.9] and 22 elderly controls (72.3 +/- 5.0 years, MMSE = 28.5 +/- 1.3). Three-dimensional T1-weighted MR images of each subject were automatically parcellated into regions of interest (ROIs). Based upon the characteristics of gray matter extracted from each ROI, we used an SVM algorithm to classify the subjects and statistical procedures based on bootstrap resampling to ensure the robustness of the results. RESULTS: We obtained 94.5% mean correct classification for AD and control subjects (mean specificity, 96.6%; mean sensitivity, 91.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our method has the potential in distinguishing patients with AD from elderly controls and therefore may help in the early diagnosis of AD.
PURPOSE: We present and evaluate a new automated method based on support vector machine (SVM) classification of whole-brain anatomical magnetic resonance imaging to discriminate between patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and elderly control subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 16 patients with AD [mean age +/- standard deviation (SD) = 74.1 +/- 5.2 years, mini-mental score examination (MMSE) = 23.1 +/- 2.9] and 22 elderly controls (72.3 +/- 5.0 years, MMSE = 28.5 +/- 1.3). Three-dimensional T1-weighted MR images of each subject were automatically parcellated into regions of interest (ROIs). Based upon the characteristics of gray matter extracted from each ROI, we used an SVM algorithm to classify the subjects and statistical procedures based on bootstrap resampling to ensure the robustness of the results. RESULTS: We obtained 94.5% mean correct classification for AD and control subjects (mean specificity, 96.6%; mean sensitivity, 91.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our method has the potential in distinguishing patients with AD from elderly controls and therefore may help in the early diagnosis of AD.
Authors: Cleusa P Ferri; Martin Prince; Carol Brayne; Henry Brodaty; Laura Fratiglioni; Mary Ganguli; Kathleen Hall; Kazuo Hasegawa; Hugh Hendrie; Yueqin Huang; Anthony Jorm; Colin Mathers; Paulo R Menezes; Elizabeth Rimmer; Marcia Scazufca Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Agnès A Dorion; Marie Sarazin; Dominique Hasboun; Valerie Hahn-Barma; Bruno Dubois; Adberrezak Zouaoui; Claude Marsault; Michel Duyme Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2002 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Stefan J Teipel; Christine Born; Michael Ewers; Arun L W Bokde; Maximilian F Reiser; Hans-Jürgen Möller; Harald Hampel Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2007-07-18 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: S Lehéricy; M Baulac; J Chiras; L Piérot; N Martin; B Pillon; B Deweer; B Dubois; C Marsault Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1994-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Wajid Mumtaz; Syed Saad Azhar Ali; Mohd Azhar Mohd Yasin; Aamir Saeed Malik Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Alexander V Lebedev; E Westman; M K Beyer; M G Kramberger; C Aguilar; Z Pirtosek; D Aarsland Journal: J Neurol Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Cyril R Pernet; Jean Baptiste Poline; Jean François Demonet; Guillaume A Rousselet Journal: BMC Neurosci Date: 2009-06-25 Impact factor: 3.288