Back

Diffusion model enables quantitative CBF analysis of Alzheimer's Disease

Shou, Q.; Cen, S.; Chen, N.-k.; Ringman, J. M.; Wen, J.; Kim, H.; Wang, D. J.

2024-07-03 neurology
10.1101/2024.07.01.24309791 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesCerebral blood flow (CBF) measured by arterial spin labeling (ASL) is a promising biomarker for Alzheimers Disease (AD). ASL data from multiple vendors were included in the Alzheimers Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset. However, the M0 images were missing in Siemens ASL data, prohibiting CBF quantification. Here, we utilized a generative diffusion model to impute the missing M0 and validated generated CBF data with acquired data from GE. MethodsA conditional latent diffusion model was trained to generate the M0 image and validate it on an in-house dataset (N=55) based on image similarity metrics, accuracy of CBF quantification, and consistency with the physical model. This model was then applied to the ADNI dataset (Siemens: N=211) to impute the missing M0 for CBF calculation. We further compared the imputed data (Siemens) and acquired data (GE) regarding regional CBF differences by AD stages, their classification accuracy for AD prediction, and CBF trajectory slopes estimated by a mixed effect model. ResultsThe trained diffusion model generated the M0 image with high fidelity (Structural similarity index, SSIM=0.924{+/-}0.019; peak signal-to-noise ratio, PSNR=33.348{+/-}1.831) and caused minimal bias in CBF values (mean difference in whole brain is 1.07{+/-}2.12ml/100g/min). Both generated and acquired CBF data showed similar differentiation patterns by AD stages, similar classification performance, and decreasing slopes with AD progression in specific AD-related regions. Generated CBF data also improved accuracy in classifying AD stages compared to qualitative perfusion data. Interpretation/ConclusionThis study shows the potential of diffusion models for imputing missing modalities for large-scale studies of CBF variation with AD.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.