4.4 Article

Analysis of longitudinal diffusion-weighted images in healthy and pathological aging: An ADNI study

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS
Volume 278, Issue -, Pages 101-115

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.12.020

Keywords

Voxel-based morphometry; Linear mixed-effects modeling; Aging; Biomarker; Longitudinal imaging; Alzheimer's disease

Funding

  1. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health Grant) [U01 AG024904]
  2. DOD ADNI (Department of Defense) [W81XWH-12-2-0012]
  3. National Institute on Aging
  4. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
  5. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  6. AbbVie
  7. Alzheimer's Association
  8. Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation
  9. Araclon Biotech
  10. BioClinica, Inc.
  11. Biogen
  12. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
  13. CereSpir, Inc.
  14. Eisai Inc.
  15. Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  16. Eli Lilly and Company
  17. Eurolmmun
  18. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd
  19. Genentech, Inc.
  20. Fujirebio
  21. GE Healthcare
  22. IX-ICO Ltd.
  23. Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development, LLC.
  24. John-son & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development LLC.
  25. Lumosity
  26. Lundbeck
  27. Merck Co., Inc.
  28. MesoScale Diagnostics, LLC.
  29. NeuroRx Research
  30. Neurotrack Technologies
  31. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
  32. Pfizer Inc.
  33. Piramal Imaging
  34. Servier
  35. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company
  36. Transition Therapeutics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background & new method: The widely used framework of voxel-based morphometry for analyzing neuroimages is extended here to model longitudinal imaging data by exchanging the linear model with a linear mixed-effects model. The new approach is employed for analyzing a large longitudinal sample of 756 diffusion-weighted images acquired in 177 subjects of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging initiative (ADNI). Results and comparison with existing methods: While sample- and group-level results from both approaches are equivalent, the mixed-effect model yields information at the single subject level. Interestingly, the neurobiological relevance of the relevant parameter at the individual level describes specific differences associated with aging. In addition, our approach highlights white matter areas that reliably discriminate between patients with Alzheimer's disease and healthy controls with a predictive power of 0.99 and include the hippocampal alveus, the para-hippocampal white matter, the white matter of the posterior cingulate, and optic tracts. In this context, notably the classifier includes a sub-population of patients with minimal cognitive impairment into the pathological domain. Conclusion: Our classifier offers promising features for an accessible biomarker that predicts the risk of conversion to Alzheimer's disease. Data used in preparation of this article were obtained from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database (adni.loni.usc.edu). As such, the investigators within the ADNI contributed to the design and implementation of ADNI and/or provided data but did not participate in analysis or writing of this report. A complete listing of ADNI investigators can be found at: http://adni.loni.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/how to apply/ADNI Acknowledgement List.pdf. Significance statement This study assesses neuro-degenerative processes in the brain's white matter as revealed by diffusion weighted imaging, in order to discriminate healthy from pathological aging in a large sample of elderly subjects. The analysis of time-series examinations in a linear mixed effects model allowed the discrimination of population-based aging processes from individual determinants. We demonstrate that a simple classifier based on white matter imaging data is able to predict the conversion to Alzheimer's disease with a high predictive power (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available