Van Dam Nicholas T, O'Connor David, Marcelle Enitan T, Ho Erica J, Cameron Craddock R, Tobe Russell H, Gabbay Vilma, Hudziak James J, Xavier Castellanos F, Leventhal Bennett L, Milham Michael P
Center for the Developing Brain, Child Mind Institute; Departments of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai; Center for Biomedical Imaging and Neuromodulation, Nathan Kline Institute, Orangeburg, New York.
Center for the Developing Brain, Child Mind Institute; Center for Biomedical Imaging and Neuromodulation, Nathan Kline Institute, Orangeburg, New York.
Biol Psychiatry. 2017 Mar 15;81(6):484-494. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2016.06.027. Epub 2016 Jul 19.
Data-driven approaches can capture behavioral and biological variation currently unaccounted for by contemporary diagnostic categories, thereby enhancing the ability of neurobiological studies to characterize brain-behavior relationships.
A community-ascertained sample of individuals (N = 347, 18-59 years of age) completed a battery of behavioral measures, psychiatric assessment, and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging in a cross-sectional design. Bootstrap-based exploratory factor analysis was applied to 49 phenotypic subscales from 10 measures. Hybrid hierarchical clustering was applied to resultant factor scores to identify nested groups. Adjacent groups were compared via independent samples t tests and chi-square tests of factor scores, syndrome scores, and psychiatric prevalence. Multivariate distance matrix regression examined functional connectome differences between adjacent groups.
Reduction yielded six factors, which explained 77.8% and 65.4% of the variance in exploratory and constrained exploratory models, respectively. Hybrid hierarchical clustering of these six factors identified two, four, and eight nested groups (i.e., phenotypic communities). At the highest clustering level, the algorithm differentiated functionally adaptive and maladaptive groups. At the middle clustering level, groups were separated by problem type (maladaptive groups; internalizing vs. externalizing problems) and behavioral type (adaptive groups; sensation-seeking vs. extraverted/emotionally stable). Unique phenotypic profiles were also evident at the lowest clustering level. Group comparisons exhibited significant differences in intrinsic functional connectivity at the highest clustering level in somatomotor, thalamic, basal ganglia, and limbic networks.
Data-driven approaches for identifying homogenous subgroups, spanning typical function to dysfunction, not only yielded clinically meaningful groups, but also captured behavioral and neurobiological variation among healthy individuals.
数据驱动方法能够捕捉当代诊断类别目前未涵盖的行为和生物学变异,从而增强神经生物学研究刻画脑-行为关系的能力。
采用横断面设计,对一个社区确定的个体样本(N = 347,年龄18 - 59岁)进行了一系列行为测量、精神病学评估和静息态功能磁共振成像。基于自助法的探索性因子分析应用于来自10项测量的49个表型子量表。混合层次聚类应用于所得因子得分以识别嵌套组。通过独立样本t检验和因子得分、综合征得分及精神疾病患病率的卡方检验对相邻组进行比较。多变量距离矩阵回归检验相邻组之间的功能连接组差异。
降维产生了六个因子,分别解释了探索性模型和约束性探索性模型中方差的77.8%和65.4%。对这六个因子进行混合层次聚类,识别出两个、四个和八个嵌套组(即表型群落)。在最高聚类水平上,该算法区分了功能适应性和适应不良性组。在中间聚类水平上,各组按问题类型(适应不良性组;内化问题与外化问题)和行为类型(适应性组;寻求刺激与外向/情绪稳定)进行区分。在最低聚类水平上也有独特的表型特征。组间比较显示,在最高聚类水平上,躯体运动、丘脑、基底神经节和边缘网络的内在功能连接存在显著差异。
用于识别从典型功能到功能障碍的同质亚组的数据驱动方法,不仅产生了具有临床意义的组,还捕捉了健康个体之间的行为和神经生物学变异。