Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy Technische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany; Behavioral Epidemiology Technische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany; Department of Psychology Neuroimaging CenterTechnische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany.
Institute of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy Technische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany; Department of Psychology Neuroimaging Center Technische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany; Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics, and Psychotherapy University Hospital Wuerzburg Wuerzburg Germany.
Brain Behav. 2017 Feb 12;7(3):e00633. doi: 10.1002/brb3.633. eCollection 2017 Mar.
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is difficult to recognize and hard to separate from major depression (MD) in clinical settings. Biomarkers might support diagnostic decisions. This study used machine learning on multimodal biobehavioral data from a sample of GAD, MD and healthy subjects to differentiate subjects with a disorder from healthy subjects (case-classification) and to differentiate GAD from MD (disorder-classification).
Subjects with GAD ( = 19), MD without GAD ( = 14), and healthy comparison subjects ( = 24) were included. The sample was matched regarding age, sex, handedness and education and free of psychopharmacological medication. Binary support vector machines were used within a nested leave-one-out cross-validation framework. Clinical questionnaires, cortisol release, gray matter (GM), and white matter (WM) volumes were used as input data separately and in combination.
Questionnaire data were well-suited for case-classification but not disorder-classification (accuracies: 96.40%, < .001; 56.58%, > .22). The opposite pattern was found for imaging data (case-classification GM/WM: 58.71%, = .09/43.18%, > .66; disorder-classification GM/WM: 68.05%, = .034/58.27%, > .15) and for cortisol data (38.02%, = .84; 74.60%, = .009). All data combined achieved 90.10% accuracy ( < .001) for case-classification and 67.46% accuracy ( = .0268) for disorder-classification.
In line with previous evidence, classification of GAD was difficult using clinical questionnaire data alone. Particularly cortisol and GM volume data were able to provide incremental value for the classification of GAD. Findings suggest that neurobiological biomarkers are a useful target for further research to delineate their potential contribution to diagnostic processes.
广泛性焦虑障碍(GAD)在临床环境中难以识别且难以与重度抑郁症(MD)区分。生物标志物可能有助于诊断决策。本研究使用机器学习对 GAD、MD 和健康受试者的多模态生物行为数据进行分析,以区分患有疾病的受试者和健康受试者(病例分类),并区分 GAD 和 MD(疾病分类)。
纳入了 GAD 患者(n=19)、无 GAD 的 MD 患者(n=14)和健康对照受试者(n=24)。样本在年龄、性别、利手性和教育程度方面相匹配,且无精神药理学药物治疗。在嵌套留一法交叉验证框架内使用二元支持向量机。临床问卷、皮质醇释放、灰质(GM)和白质(WM)体积分别作为输入数据,并组合使用。
问卷数据非常适合病例分类,但不适合疾病分类(准确率:96.40%,<0.001;56.58%,>0.22)。而影像学数据则呈现出相反的模式(病例分类 GM/WM:58.71%,=0.09/43.18%,>0.66;疾病分类 GM/WM:68.05%,=0.034/58.27%,>0.15)和皮质醇数据(38.02%,=0.84;74.60%,=0.009)。所有数据结合后,病例分类的准确率为 90.10%(<0.001),疾病分类的准确率为 67.46%(=0.0268)。
与之前的证据一致,仅使用临床问卷数据对 GAD 进行分类较为困难。皮质醇和 GM 体积数据尤其能够为 GAD 的分类提供额外的价值。研究结果表明,神经生物学标志物是进一步研究的一个有用目标,以阐明其对诊断过程的潜在贡献。