Back

Neighbourhood topology unveils pathological hubs in the brain networks of epilepsy-surgery patients

Di Gaetano, L.; Santos, F. A. N.; Battiston, F.; Bianconi, G.; Defenu, N.; Nissen, I.; van Straaten, E. C. W.; Hillebrand, A.; Millan, A. P.

2024-10-04 neurology
10.1101/2024.10.02.24314429 medRxiv
Show abstract

Pathological hubs in the brain networks of epilepsy patients are hypothesized to drive seizure generation and propagation. In epilepsy-surgery patients, these hubs have traditionally been associated with the resection area: the region removed during the surgery with the goal of stopping the seizures, and which is typically used as a proxy for the epileptogenic zone. However, recent studies hypothesize that pathological hubs may extend to the vicinity of the resection area, potentially complicating post-surgical seizure control. Here we propose a neighbourhood-based analysis of brain organization to investigate this hypothesis. We exploit a large dataset of presurgical MEG (magnetoencephalography)-derived whole-brain networks from 91 epilepsy-surgery patients. Our neighbourhood-focus is two-fold. Firstly, we propose a partition of the brain regions into three sets, namely resected nodes, their neighbours, and the remaining network nodes. Secondly, we introduce generalized centrality metrics that describe the neighrbourhood of each node, providing a regional measure of hubness. Our analyses reveal that both the resection area and its neighborhood present large hub-status, but with significant variability across patients. For some, hubs appear in the resection area; for others, in its neighborhood. Moreover, this variability does not correlate with surgical outcome. These results highlight the potential of neighborhood-based analyses to uncover novel insights into brain connectivity in brain pathologies, and the need for individualized studies, with large-enough cohorts, that account for patient-specific variability.

Published in Brain Communications (predicted rank #9) · training set

Matching journals

The top 4 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.