Anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diffusion MRI and resting state functional MRI (rs-fMRI) have been used for Alzheimer's disease (AD) classification. These scans are typically used to... Show moreAnatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diffusion MRI and resting state functional MRI (rs-fMRI) have been used for Alzheimer's disease (AD) classification. These scans are typically used to build models for discriminating AD patients from control subjects, but it is not clear if these models can also discriminate AD in diverse clinical populations as found in memory clinics.To study this, we trained MRI-based AD classification models on a single centre data set consisting of AD patients (N = 76) and controls (N = 173), and used these models to assign AD scores to subjective memory complainers (N = 67), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients (N = 61), and AD patients (N = 61) from a multi-centre memory clinic data set. The anatomical MRI scans were used to calculate grey matter density, subcortical volumes and cortical thickness, the diffusion MRI scans were used to calculate fractional anisotropy, mean, axial and radial diffusivity, and the rs-fMRI scans were used to calculate functional connectivity between resting state networks and amplitude of low frequency fluctuations. Within the multi-centre memory clinic data set we removed scan site differences prior to applying the models.For all models, on average, the AD patients were assigned the highest AD scores, followed by MCI patients, and later followed by SMC subjects. The anatomical MRI models performed best, and the best performing anatomical MRI measure was grey matter density, separating SMC subjects from MCI patients with an AUC of 0.69, MCI patients from AD patients with an AUC of 0.70, and SMC patients from AD patients with an AUC of 0.86. The diffusion MRI models did not generalise well to the memory clinic data, possibly because of large scan site differences. The functional connectivity model separated SMC subjects and MCI patients relatively good (AUC = 0.66). The multimodal MRI model did not improve upon the anatomical MRI model.In conclusion, we showed that the grey matter density model generalises best to memory clinic subjects. When also considering the fact that grey matter density generally performs well in AD classification studies, this feature is probably the best MRI-based feature for AD diagnosis in clinical practice. Show less
Bouts, M.J.R.J.; Grond, J. van der; Vernooij, M.W.; Koini, M.; Schouten, T.M.; Vos, F. de; ... ; Rombouts, S.A.R.B. 2019
Several anatomical MRI markers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been identified. Hippocampal volume, cortical thickness, and grey matter density have been used successfully to discriminate AD... Show moreSeveral anatomical MRI markers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been identified. Hippocampal volume, cortical thickness, and grey matter density have been used successfully to discriminate AD patients from controls. These anatomical MRI measures have so far mainly been used separately. The full potential of anatomical MRI scans for AD diagnosis might thus not yet have been used optimally. In this study, we therefore combined multiple anatomical MRI measures to improve diagnostic classification of AD. For 21 clinically diagnosed AD patients and 21 cognitively normal controls, we calculated (i) cortical thickness, (ii) cortical area, (iii) cortical curvature, (iv) grey matter density, (v) subcortical volumes, and (vi) hippocampal shape. These six measures were used separately and combined as predictors in an elastic net logistic regression. We made receiver operating curve plots and calculated the area under the curve (AUC) to determine classification performance. AUC values for the single measures ranged from 0.67 (cortical thickness) to 0.94 (grey matter density). The combination of all six measures resulted in an AUC of 0.98. Our results demonstrate that the different anatomical MRI measures contain complementary information. A combination of these measures may therefore improve accuracy of AD diagnosis in clinical practice. Hum Brain Mapp 37:1920-1929, 2016. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Show less
Schouten, T.M.; Koini, M.; Vos, F. de; Seiler, S.; Grond, J. van der; Lechner, A.; ... ; Rombouts, S.A.R.B. 2016
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is sensitive to structural and functional changes in the brain caused by Alzheimer's disease (AD), and can therefore be used to help in diagnosing the disease.... Show moreMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is sensitive to structural and functional changes in the brain caused by Alzheimer's disease (AD), and can therefore be used to help in diagnosing the disease. Improving classification of AD patients based on MRI scans might help to identify AD earlier in the disease's progress, which may be key in developing treatments for AD. In this study we used an elastic net classifier based on several measures derived from the MRI scans of mild to moderate AD patients (N = 77) from the prospective registry on dementia study and controls (N = 173) from the Austrian Stroke Prevention Family Study. We based our classification on measures from anatomical MRI, diffusion weighted MRI and resting state functional MRI. Our unimodal classification performance ranged from an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.760 (full correlations between functional networks) to 0.909 (grey matter density). When combining measures from multiple modalities in a stepwise manner, the classification performance improved to an AUC of 0.952. This optimal combination consisted of grey matter density, white matter density, fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and sparse partial correlations between functional networks. Classification performance for mild AD as well as moderate AD also improved when using this multimodal combination. We conclude that different MRI modalities provide complementary information for classifying AD. Moreover, combining multiple modalities can substantially improve classification performance over unimodal classification. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. Show less
