Predicting Alzheimer’s disease progression trajectory and clinical subtypes using machine learning
Satone, V. K.; Kaur, R.; Leonard, H.; Iwaki, H.; Sargent, L.; Scholz, S. W.; Nalls, M. A.; Singleton, A. B.; Faghri, F.; Campbell, R. H.; Alzheimers Disease Neuroimaging Initiative,
Show abstract
BackgroundAlzheimers disease (AD) is a common, age-related, neurodegenerative disease that impairs a persons ability to perform day-to-day activities. Diagnosing AD is challenging, especially in the early stages. Many patients still go undiagnosed, partly due to the complex heterogeneity in disease progression. This highlights a need for early prediction of the disease course to assist its treatment and tailor therapy options to the disease progression rate. Recent developments in machine learning techniques provide the potential to not only predict disease progression and trajectory of AD but also to classify the disease into different etiological subtypes. Methods and findingsThe work shown here clusters participants in distinct and multifaceted progression subgroups of AD and discusses an approach to predict the progression rate from baseline diagnosis. We observed that the myriad of clinically reported symptoms summarized in the proposed AD progression space corresponds directly with memory and cognitive measures, which are routinely used to monitor disease onset and progression. Our analysis demonstrated accurate prediction of disease progression after four years from the first 12 months of post-diagnosis clinical data (Area Under the Curve of 0.96 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92-1.0), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74-0.88) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.96-1.0) for slow, moderate and fast progression rate patients respectively). Further, we explored the long short-term memory (LSTM) neural networks to predict the trajectory of an individual patients progression. ConclusionThe machine learning techniques presented in this study may assist providers in identifying different progression rates and trajectories in the early stages of the disease, hence allowing for more efficient and personalized healthcare deliveries. With additional information about the progression rate of AD at hand, providers may further individualize the treatment plans. The predictive tests discussed in this study not only allow for early AD diagnosis but also facilitate the characterization of distinct AD subtypes relating to trajectories of disease progression. These findings are a crucial step forward for early disease detection. These models can be used to design improved clinical trials for AD research.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- c-Triadem: A constrained, explainable deep learning model to identify novel biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease 98%
- Random forest model for feature-based Alzheimer's disease conversion prediction from early mild cognitive impairment subjects 97%
- Interpretable multivariate survival models: Improving predictions for conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimers disease (AD) via data fusion and machine learning 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Screening for early-stage Alzheimer's disease using optimized feature sets and machine learning 97%
- An AI-assisted Online Tool for Cognitive Impairment Detection Using Images from the Clock Drawing Test 97%
- Topographical overlapping of the Aβ and Tau pathologies in the Default mode networks predicts Alzheimer’s Disease with higher specificity 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Quantitative longitudinal predictions of Alzheimer's disease by multi-modal predictive learning 97%
- Towards the development of a management protocol for Subjective Cognitive Decline: insights from a cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of multimodal clinical data 94%
- Common molecular signatures between coronavirus infection and Alzheimer's disease reveal targets for drug development 94%
"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.