Jared M Scott1,2, Stephen V Gliske3,4, Levin Kuhlmann5, William C Stacey1,2,3. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States. 2. Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Michigan Hospitals, Ann Arbor, MI, United States. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States. 5. Department of Data Science and AI, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
Motivation: There is an ongoing search for definitive and reliable biomarkers to forecast or predict imminent seizure onset, but to date most research has been limited to EEG with sampling rates <1,000 Hz. High-frequency oscillations (HFOs) have gained acceptance as an indicator of epileptic tissue, but few have investigated the temporal properties of HFOs or their potential role as a predictor in seizure prediction. Here we evaluate time-varying trends in preictal HFO rates as a potential biomarker of seizure prediction. Methods: HFOs were identified for all interictal and preictal periods with a validated automated detector in 27 patients who underwent intracranial EEG monitoring. We used LASSO logistic regression with several features of the HFO rate to distinguish preictal from interictal periods in each individual. We then tested these models with held-out data and evaluated their performance with the area-under-the-curve (AUC) of their receiver-operating curve (ROC). Finally, we assessed the significance of these results using non-parametric statistical tests. Results: There was variability in the ability of HFOs to discern preictal from interictal states across our cohort. We identified a subset of 10 patients in whom the presence of the preictal state could be successfully predicted better than chance. For some of these individuals, average AUC in the held-out data reached higher than 0.80, which suggests that HFO rates can significantly differentiate preictal and interictal periods for certain patients. Significance: These findings show that temporal trends in HFO rate can predict the preictal state better than random chance in some individuals. Such promising results indicate that future prediction efforts would benefit from the inclusion of high-frequency information in their predictive models and technological architecture.
Motivation: There is an ongoing search for definitive and reliable biomarkers to forecast or predict imminent seizure onset, but to date most research has been limited to EEG with sampling rates <1,000 Hz. High-frequency oscillations (HFOs) have gained acceptance as an indicator of epileptic tissue, but few have investigated the temporal properties of HFOs or their potential role as a predictor in seizure prediction. Here we evaluate time-varying trends in preictal HFO rates as a potential biomarker of seizure prediction. Methods: HFOs were identified for all interictal and preictal periods with a validated automated detector in 27 patients who underwent intracranial EEG monitoring. We used LASSO logistic regression with several features of the HFO rate to distinguish preictal from interictal periods in each individual. We then tested these models with held-out data and evaluated their performance with the area-under-the-curve (AUC) of their receiver-operating curve (ROC). Finally, we assessed the significance of these results using non-parametric statistical tests. Results: There was variability in the ability of HFOs to discern preictal from interictal states across our cohort. We identified a subset of 10 patients in whom the presence of the preictal state could be successfully predicted better than chance. For some of these individuals, average AUC in the held-out data reached higher than 0.80, which suggests that HFO rates can significantly differentiate preictal and interictal periods for certain patients. Significance: These findings show that temporal trends in HFO rate can predict the preictal state better than random chance in some individuals. Such promising results indicate that future prediction efforts would benefit from the inclusion of high-frequency information in their predictive models and technological architecture.
Authors: Maeike Zijlmans; Premysl Jiruska; Rina Zelmann; Frans S S Leijten; John G R Jefferys; Jean Gotman Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Birgit Frauscher; Fabrice Bartolomei; Katsuhiro Kobayashi; Jan Cimbalnik; Maryse A van 't Klooster; Stefan Rampp; Hiroshi Otsubo; Yvonne Höller; Joyce Y Wu; Eishi Asano; Jerome Engel; Philippe Kahane; Julia Jacobs; Jean Gotman Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Levin Kuhlmann; Klaus Lehnertz; Mark P Richardson; Björn Schelter; Hitten P Zaveri Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Justin A Blanco; Matt Stead; Abba Krieger; William Stacey; Douglas Maus; Eric Marsh; Jonathan Viventi; Kendall H Lee; Richard Marsh; Brian Litt; Gregory A Worrell Journal: Brain Date: 2011-09-08 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Mark J Cook; Terence J O'Brien; Samuel F Berkovic; Michael Murphy; Andrew Morokoff; Gavin Fabinyi; Wendyl D'Souza; Raju Yerra; John Archer; Lucas Litewka; Sean Hosking; Paul Lightfoot; Vanessa Ruedebusch; W Douglas Sheffield; David Snyder; Kent Leyde; David Himes Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 44.182