Journal
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
Volume 32, Issue 10, Pages 6965-6976Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-09081-y
Keywords
Radiomic features; Hippocampus segmentation; Alzheimer's disease; Machine learning; Magnetic resonance imaging
Funding
- Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health) [U01 AG024904]
- DOD ADNI (Department of Defense) [W81XWH-12-2-0012]
- National Institute on Aging
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
- AbbVie
- Alzheimer's Association
- Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation
- Araclon Biotech
- BioClinica, Inc.
- Biogen
- CereSpir, Inc.
- Cogstate
- Eisai Inc.
- Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
- Eli Lilly and Company
- EuroImmun
- F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
- Genentech, Inc.
- Fujirebio
- GE Healthcare
- IXICO Ltd.
- Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development, LLC
- Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development LLC
- Lumosity
- Lundbeck
- Merck Co., Inc.
- Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC
- NeuroRx Research
- Neurotrack Technologies
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
- Pfizer Inc.
- Piramal Imaging
- Servier
- Takeda Pharmaceutical Company
- Transition Therapeutics
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This study investigates how different hippocampal segmentation methods affect the accuracy of hippocampal radiomic features (HRFs) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) analysis. The results show that HRFs exhibit high consistency across different segmentation methods and the best performance in AD classification is obtained when HRFs are extracted using the naive majority voting method with a more sufficient segmentation and relatively low hippocampal segmentation accuracy.
Objectives Hippocampal radiomic features (HRFs) can serve as biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, how different hippocampal segmentation methods affect HRFs in AD is still unknown. The aim of the study was to investigate how different segmentation methods affect HRF accuracy in AD analysis. Methods A total of 1650 subjects were identified from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database (ADNI). The mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and Alzheimer's disease assessment scale (ADAS-cog13) were also adopted. After calculating the HRFs of intensity, shape, and textural features from each side of the hippocampus in structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI), the consistency of HRFs calculated from 7 different hippocampal segmentation methods was validated, and the performance of machine learning-based classification of AD vs. normal control (NC) adopting the different HRFs was also examined. Additional 571 subjects from the European DTI Study on Dementia database (EDSD) were to validate the consistency of results. Results Between different segmentations, HRFs showed a high measurement consistency (R > 0.7), a high significant consistency between NC, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and AD (T-value plot, R > 0.8), and consistent significant correlations between HRFs and MMSE/ADAS-cog13 (p < 0.05). The best NC vs. AD classification was obtained when the hippocampus was sufficiently segmented by primitive majority voting (threshold = 0.2). High consistent results were reproduced from independent EDSD cohort. Conclusions HRFs exhibited high consistency across different hippocampal segmentation methods, and the best performance in AD classification was obtained when HRFs were extracted by the naive majority voting method with a more sufficient segmentation and relatively low hippocampus segmentation accuracy.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available