| Literature DB >> 36092645 |
Jaime A Pereira1,2, Andreas Ray3, Mohit Rana2,3, Claudio Silva4, Cesar Salinas4, Francisco Zamorano4,5, Martin Irani1, Patricia Opazo1, Ranganatha Sitaram1,2,6, Sergio Ruiz1,2.
Abstract
Most clinical neurofeedback studies based on functional magnetic resonance imaging use the patient's own neural activity as feedback. The objective of this study was to create a subject-independent brain state classifier as part of a real-time fMRI neurofeedback (rt-fMRI NF) system that can guide patients with depression in achieving a healthy brain state, and then to examine subsequent clinical changes. In a first step, a brain classifier based on a support vector machine (SVM) was trained from the neural information of happy autobiographical imagery and motor imagery blocks received from a healthy female participant during an MRI session. In the second step, 7 right-handed female patients with mild or moderate depressive symptoms were trained to match their own neural activity with the neural activity corresponding to the "happiness emotional brain state" of the healthy participant. The training (4 training sessions over 2 weeks) was carried out using the rt-fMRI NF system guided by the brain-state classifier we had created. Thus, the informative voxels previously obtained in the first step, using SVM classification and Effect Mapping, were used to classify the Blood-Oxygen-Level Dependent (BOLD) activity of the patients and converted into real-time visual feedback during the neurofeedback training runs. Improvements in the classifier accuracy toward the end of the training were observed in all the patients [Session 4-1 Median = 6.563%; Range = 4.10-27.34; Wilcoxon Test (0), 2-tailed p = 0.031]. Clinical improvement also was observed in a blind standardized clinical evaluation [HDRS CE2-1 Median = 7; Range 2 to 15; Wilcoxon Test (0), 2-tailed p = 0.016], and in self-report assessments [BDI-II CE2-1 Median = 8; Range 1-15; Wilcoxon Test (0), 2-tailed p = 0.031]. In addition, the clinical improvement was still present 10 days after the intervention [BDI-II CE3-2_Median = 0; Range -1 to 2; Wilcoxon Test (0), 2-tailed p = 0.50/ HDRS CE3-2 Median = 0; Range -1 to 2; Wilcoxon Test (0), 2-tailed p = 0.625]. Although the number of participants needs to be increased and a control group included to confirm these findings, the results suggest a novel option for neural modulation and clinical alleviation in depression using noninvasive stimulation technologies.Entities:
Keywords: brain-computer interfaces; brain-pattern classification; depression; endogenous neurostimulation; neurofeedback; neuromodulation; real-time fMRI; support-vector machine
Year: 2022 PMID: 36092645 PMCID: PMC9452730 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.933559
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.473
Figure 1Flow chart of the 2-step experimental protocol. 1. Building the classifier with the neural information (BOLD signal) of the healthy subject. 2. Training of the participant with depressive symptoms using an rt-fMRI NF system based on the classifier.
Offline performance of classifiers in 4 cross-validations.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 0.97 | 0.95 | 0.99 |
| (28 yo) | 2 | 0.87 | 0.86 | 0.88 |
| 3 | 0.92 | 0.94 | 0.90 | |
| 4 | 0.84 | 0.76 | 0.93 | |
| Average | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.92 | |
| 2 | 1 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.90 |
| (26 yo) | 2 | 0.96 | 0.94 | 0.99 |
| 3 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.95 | |
| 4 | 0.91 | 0.86 | 0.95 | |
| Average | 0.93 | 0.92 | 0.95 | |
| 3 | 1 | 0.76 | 0.80 | 0.71 |
| (18 yo) | 2 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 0.84 |
| 3 | 0.83 | 0.81 | 0.85 | |
| 4 | 0.72 | 0.75 | 0.69 | |
| Average | 0.79 | 0.81 | 0.77 |
Figure 2Pre-processing of the functional images for online subject-independent classification. A structural imaging session and a Dummy functional imaging session are performed prior to the functional imaging session of the online classification. The average of the Dummy functional images is co-registered with the structural neuroimaging to obtain the normalization parameters that will be used in the abbreviated pre-processing of the functional neuroimages used in the online classification.
Figure 3Group classifier accuracy per day. (Mean ± SD; 2-tailed t-test; one-sample z test against zero).
Figure 4Difference in classifier accuracy between baseline and end of training for patients with depressive symptoms (Mean ± SD. All points plotted. One-sample Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test compared with zero, p two-tailed, 95% confidence).
Figure 5Clinical changes observed. The clinical assessments at baseline, at the end of rt-fMRI NF training, and 10 days later, can be observed for the BDI-II self-report scale (A) and for the standardized clinical assessment HDRS (B). In addition, the difference between depressive symptomatology evaluated between baseline, the end of training and 10 days after training, is observed for both BDI-II (C) and HDRS (D). The dots represent the assessments for each patient (All points plotted. Mean ± SD. *p ≤ 0.05; One-sample Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test compared with zero, p two-tailed, 95% confidence).