Back

Resting-state based prediction of task-related activation in patients with disorders of consciousness

Craig, M. M.; Pappas, I.; Allanson, J.; Finoia, P.; Williams, G.; Pickard, J. D.; Menon, D.; Stamatakis, E.

2021-03-29 neuroscience
10.1101/2021.03.27.436534 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAssessment of the level of awareness of people with disorders of consciousness (DOC) is clinically challenging, motivating several studies to combine brain imaging with machine learning to improve this process. While this work has shown promise, it has limited clinical utility, as misdiagnosis of DOC patients is relatively high. As machine learning algorithms rely on accurately labelled data, any error in diagnosis will be learned by the algorithm, resulting in an equally limited diagnostic tool. The goal of the present study is to overcome this problem by stratifying patients, not by diagnosis, but by their capacity to perform volitional tasks during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanning. MethodsA total of 71 patients were assessed for inclusion. They were excluded for the final analysis if they had large focal brain damage, excessive head motion during scanning, or suboptimal MRI preprocessing. Patients underwent both resting-state and task-based fMRI scanning. Univariate fMRI analysis was performed to determine if an individual patient had brain activity consistent with having retained volitional capacity (VC). Differences in resting brain network connectivity between patients with VC and patients without volitional capacity (non-VC) were measured. Connectivity data was then entered as input to a deep learning framework. We used a deep graph convolutional neural network (DGCNN) on connectivity data to identify a specific brain network that most significantly differentiates patients. FindingsWe included 30 patients in our final analysis. Univariate analysis revealed that 13 patients displayed signs of VC, while 17 did not. We found that resting-state connectivity between frontoparietal control and salience network was significantly different between VC and non-VC patients (T(28) = 3.347, p = 0.0023, Bonferroni corrected p = 0.042). Furthermore, we found that using frontoparietal control network connectivity as input to the DGCNN resulted in the best classification performance (test accuracy = 0.85; ROC AUC = 0.92). InterpretationWe found that the DGCNN performed best at discriminating between patients with VC when using only the frontoparietal control network as input to the model. The use of this deep learning method is a significant advance since its inherent flexibility permits the inclusion of both whole-brain and network-specific properties as input, allowing us to classify patients as either having or not having VC. This inclusion of multi-scale inputs (e.g. whole-brain and network-level) facilitates model interpretability and increases our understanding of the neurobiology of DOC. The results propose that the integrity of frontoparietal control network, a brain network well known to play a key role in executive functions and cognitive control, is essential for volitional capacity preservation in patients with DOC. The study also lays groundwork for development of a biomarker to aid in the diagnosis of DOC patients. RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSDisorders of consciousness (DOC) are a group of severe brain disorders characterised by damage to the neural systems underlying wakefulness and awareness. DOC are often caused by traumatic brain injury, hypoxia, or neurodegenerative diseases. The motor and cognitive impairments in DOC patients make providing an accurate diagnosis very challenging. Diagnosis is primarily made at the bedside by assessing a patients response to motor commands.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
2
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.2%
3
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
6.2%
4
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.2%
5
Brain Connectivity
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.7%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 25%
4.7%
7
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.9%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.9%
9
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
10
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.0%
50% of probability mass above
11
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
12
Frontiers in Neuroimaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
13
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
62 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
14
Neuroinformatics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
15
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
16
Brain Imaging and Behavior
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
17
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
18
Epilepsia
49 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
19
Network Neuroscience
116 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
20
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.3%
21
Cortex
102 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
22
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.2%
23
Neuroimage: Reports
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
24
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
25
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
26
Aperture Neuro
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
27
Neurophotonics
37 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
28
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 45%
0.7%
30
Molecular Psychiatry
242 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%