BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Connectivity mapping based on resting-state fMRI is rapidly developing, and this methodology has great potential for clinical applications. However, before resting-state fMRI can be applied for diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring treatment for an individual patient with neurologic or psychiatric diseases, it is essential to assess its long-term reproducibility and between-subject variations among healthy individuals. The purpose of the study was to quantify the long-term test-retest reproducibility of ICN measures derived from resting-state fMRI and to assess the between-subject variation of ICN measures across the whole brain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Longitudinal resting-state fMRI data of 6 healthy volunteers were acquired from 9 scan sessions during >1 year. The within-subject reproducibility and between-subject variation of ICN measures, across the whole brain and major nodes of the DMN, were quantified with the ICC and COV. RESULTS: Our data show that the long-term test-retest reproducibility of ICN measures is outstanding, with >70% of the connectivity networks showing an ICC > 0.60. The COV across 6 healthy volunteers in this sample was >0.2, suggesting significant between-subject variation. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that resting-state ICN measures (eg, the correlation coefficients between fMRI signal-intensity profiles from 2 different brain regions) are potentially suitable as biomarkers for monitoring disease progression and treatment effects in clinical trials and individual patients. Because between-subject variation is significant, it may be difficult to use quantitative ICN measures in their current state as a diagnostic tool.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Connectivity mapping based on resting-state fMRI is rapidly developing, and this methodology has great potential for clinical applications. However, before resting-state fMRI can be applied for diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring treatment for an individual patient with neurologic or psychiatric diseases, it is essential to assess its long-term reproducibility and between-subject variations among healthy individuals. The purpose of the study was to quantify the long-term test-retest reproducibility of ICN measures derived from resting-state fMRI and to assess the between-subject variation of ICN measures across the whole brain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Longitudinal resting-state fMRI data of 6 healthy volunteers were acquired from 9 scan sessions during >1 year. The within-subject reproducibility and between-subject variation of ICN measures, across the whole brain and major nodes of the DMN, were quantified with the ICC and COV. RESULTS: Our data show that the long-term test-retest reproducibility of ICN measures is outstanding, with >70% of the connectivity networks showing an ICC > 0.60. The COV across 6 healthy volunteers in this sample was >0.2, suggesting significant between-subject variation. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that resting-state ICN measures (eg, the correlation coefficients between fMRI signal-intensity profiles from 2 different brain regions) are potentially suitable as biomarkers for monitoring disease progression and treatment effects in clinical trials and individual patients. Because between-subject variation is significant, it may be difficult to use quantitative ICN measures in their current state as a diagnostic tool.
Authors: N Tzourio-Mazoyer; B Landeau; D Papathanassiou; F Crivello; O Etard; N Delcroix; B Mazoyer; M Joliot Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Michael D Fox; Maurizio Corbetta; Abraham Z Snyder; Justin L Vincent; Marcus E Raichle Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-06-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: C J Honey; O Sporns; L Cammoun; X Gigandet; J P Thiran; R Meuli; P Hagmann Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2009-02-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Dost Ongür; Miriam Lundy; Ian Greenhouse; Ann K Shinn; Vinod Menon; Bruce M Cohen; Perry F Renshaw Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2010-06-09 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Charles Gasparovic; Edward J Bedrick; Andrew R Mayer; Ronald A Yeo; Hongji Chen; Eswar Damaraju; Vince D Calhoun; Rex E Jung Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-02-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Aaron P Schultz; Jasmeer P Chhatwal; Willem Huijbers; Trey Hedden; Koene R A van Dijk; Donald G McLaren; Andrew M Ward; Sarah Wigman; Reisa A Sperling Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2014-08-21 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Javier Gonzalez-Castillo; Colin W Hoy; Daniel A Handwerker; Meghan E Robinson; Laura C Buchanan; Ziad S Saad; Peter A Bandettini Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Pradyumna Lanka; D Rangaprakash; Michael N Dretsch; Jeffrey S Katz; Thomas S Denney; Gopikrishna Deshpande Journal: Brain Imaging Behav Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 3.978
Authors: Raag D Airan; Joshua T Vogelstein; Jay J Pillai; Brian Caffo; James J Pekar; Haris I Sair Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2016-03-25 Impact factor: 5.038