| Literature DB >> 30046142 |
Sebastian Moguilner1,2,3, Adolfo M García1,4,5, Ezequiel Mikulan1,4, Eugenia Hesse1,4,6, Indira García-Cordero1,4, Margherita Melloni1,4, Sabrina Cervetto1,7, Cecilia Serrano8, Eduar Herrera1,4,9, Pablo Reyes10, Diana Matallana10, Facundo Manes1,4,11, Agustín Ibáñez1,4,11,12,13, Lucas Sedeño14,15.
Abstract
The search for biomarkers of neurodegenerative diseases via fMRI functional connectivity (FC) research has yielded inconsistent results. Yet, most FC studies are blind to non-linear brain dynamics. To circumvent this limitation, we developed a "weighted Symbolic Dependence Metric" (wSDM) measure. Using symbolic transforms, we factor in local and global temporal features of the BOLD signal to weigh a robust copula-based dependence measure by symbolic similarity, capturing both linear and non-linear associations. We compared this measure with a linear connectivity metric (Pearson's R) in its capacity to identify patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and controls based on resting-state data. We recruited participants from two international centers with different MRI recordings to assess the consistency of our measure across heterogeneous conditions. First, a seed-analysis comparison of the salience network (a specific target of bvFTD) and the default-mode network (as a complementary control) between patients and controls showed that wSDM yields better identification of resting-state networks. Moreover, machine learning analysis revealed that wSDM yielded higher classification accuracy. These results were consistent across centers, highlighting their robustness despite heterogeneous conditions. Our findings underscore the potential of wSDM to assess fMRI-derived FC data, and to identify sensitive biomarkers in bvFTD.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30046142 PMCID: PMC6060104 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-29538-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Demograhic details.
| Country-1 | Country-2 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HC | bvFTD | HC | bvFTD | |||||
| N | 20 | 20* | — | — | 29 | 15 | — | — |
| Age(a) | 71.10 (5.16) | 73.95 (5.87) | 2.65 | 0.11 | 61.29 (7.16) | 65.94 (7.78) | 3.80 | 0.06 |
| Educationa | 16.72 (3.23) | 14.30 (4.57) | 2.97 | 0.09 | 14.30 (5.67) | 14 (4.47) | 0.03 | 0.86 |
| Chi-square | Chi-square | |||||||
| Genderb | F = 12 | F = 9 | 0.90 | 0.34 | F = 16 | F = 11 | 1.09 | 0.29 |
| M = 8 | M = 11 | M = 12 | M = 4 | |||||
*Five of the 25 bvFTD patients from Country-1 were discarded after preprocessing; therefore, all reported analyses (including demographic comparisons) were performed only with the remaining 20 participants.
aANOVA test. Mean (standard deviation).
bChi-square test.
HC: Healthy control.
bvFTD: behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia.
Figure 1Default mode network (DMN). (a,b) Seed analysis results of the DMN using R and wSDM at the 30th percentile threshold, for Country-1 and Country-2 (FWE-corrected, p = 0.05 on the voxel level, extent threshold = 30) (axial plane z = 48, sagittal plane x = 4). (c) Cluster overlap between Country-1 and Country-2 (FWE-corrected, p = 0.05, extent threshold = 30 voxels). (d) Consistency analysis based on a voxel-wise correlation analysis between the maps (T-values) of both countries. All brain images are presented according to neurological convention.
Figure 2Salience network (SN). (a,b) Seed analysis results of the SN using R and wSDM at the 30th percentile threshold, for Country-1 and Country-2. (FWE-corrected, p = 0.05 on the voxel level, extent threshold = 30) (axial plane z = 3, coronal plane y = 6). (c) Cluster overlap between Country-1 and Country-2 (FWE-corrected, p = 0.05, extent threshold = 30 voxels). (d) Consistency analysis based on a voxel-wise correlation analysis between the maps (T-values) of both countries. The scale of the axis is not the same between methods given the differences in T-values (data dispersion from the R method would not be well illustrated if identical scales were used for each metric). All brain images are presented according to neurological convention.
Figure 3SN bvFTD vs. healthy controls. (a,b) Seed connectivity maps (axial plane z = 3, coronal plane y = 6) comparing HC > bvFTD through a two-sample t-test in the two centers showed a very consistent engagement of the insular cortex and the ACC, two main hubs of the SN. The connectivity volumes have been previously thresholded at the 30th percentile threshold, while the SPM threshold was set to p = 0.001, extent threshold = 30 voxels. (c) Consistency analysis based on a voxel-wise correlation analysis between the maps (T-values) of both countries. The scale of the axis is not the same between methods given the differences in T-values (data dispersion from the R method would not be well illustrated if identical scales were used for each metric). All brain images are presented according to neurological convention.
Figure 4DMN bvFTD vs. healthy controls. (a,b) Seed connectivity maps (axial plane z = 48, sagittal plane 6) comparing (bvFTD < HC) through a two-sample t-test in the two centers showed a very consistent engagement of the insular cortex and the ACC, two main hubs of the SN. The connectivity volumes have been previously thresholded at the 30th percentile threshold, while the SPM threshold was set to p = 0.001, extent threshold = 30 voxels. (c) Consistency analysis based on a voxel-wise correlation analysis between the maps (T-values) of both countries. The scale of the axis is not the same between methods given the differences in T-values (data dispersion from the R method would not be well illustrated if identical scales were used for each metric). All brain images are presented according to neurological convention.
Figure 5Accuracy and ROC curves for the SVM classifier. (a,b) Classification accuracy for Country-1 and Country-2 while varying the percentile threshold, for R and wSDM (see Supplementary Table 3 for details). (c,d) ROC curves (AUC significance, p < 0.01) [Sensitivity (TPR) vs. 1-Specificity (FPR)] graph for Country-1 and Country-2, for wSDM and R, considering the optimal threshold. The area under the curve (AUC) measures the performance of the classifier across different points of the ROC space. The dashed black line represents random guess (i.e., AUC = 50).
Figure 6Accuracy and ROC curves for the KNN classifier. (a,b) Classification accuracy for Country-1 and Country-2 while varying the percentile threshold (i.e., number of features), for R and wSDM (see Supplementary Table 4 for details). (c,d) ROC curves (AUC significance, p < 0.01) [Sensitivity (TPR) vs. 1-Specificity (FPR)] graph for Country-1 and Country-2, for wSDM and R, considering the optimal threshold. The area under the curve (AUC) measures the performance of the classifier across different points of the ROC space. The dashed black line represents random guess (i.e., AUC = 50).