Zhang Han, Chen Xiaobo, Zhang Yu, Shen Dinggang
Department of Radiology and Brain Research Imaging Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel Hill, NC, United States.
Department of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea UniversitySeoul, South Korea.
Front Neurosci. 2017 Aug 2;11:439. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00439. eCollection 2017.
Functional connectivity (FC) has become a leading method for resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) analysis. However, the majority of the previous studies utilized pairwise, temporal synchronization-based FC. Recently, high-order FC (HOFC) methods were proposed with the idea of computing "correlation of correlations" to capture high-level, more complex associations among the brain regions. There are two types of HOFC. The first type is (HOFC) and its variant, (HOFC), for capturing different levels of HOFC. Instead of measuring the similarity of the original rs-fMRI signals with the traditional FC (low-order FC, or LOFC), tHOFC measures the similarity of LOFC profiles (i.e., a set of LOFC values between a region and all other regions) between each pair of brain regions. The second type is (HOFC) which defines the quadruple relationship among every four brain regions by first calculating two pairwise dynamic LOFC "time series" and then measuring their temporal synchronization (i.e., temporal correlation of the LOFC fluctuations, not the BOLD fluctuations). Applications have shown the superiority of HOFC in both disease biomarker detection and individualized diagnosis than LOFC. However, no study has been carried out for the assessment of test-retest reliability of different HOFC metrics. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the reliability of the two types of HOFC methods using test-retest rs-fMRI data from 25 (12 females, age 24.48 ± 2.55 years) young healthy adults with seven repeated scans (with interval = 3-8 days). We found that all HOFC metrics have satisfactory reliability, specifically (1) fair-to-good for tHOFC and aHOFC, and (2) fair-to-moderate for dHOFC with relatively strong connectivity strength. We further give an in-depth analysis of the biological meanings of each HOFC metric and highlight their differences compared to the LOFC from the aspects of cross-level information exchanges, within-/between-network connectivity, and modulatory connectivity. In addition, how the dynamic analysis parameter (i.e., sliding window length) affects dHOFC reliability is also investigated. Our study reveals unique functional associations characterized by the HOFC metrics. Guidance and recommendations for future applications and clinical research using HOFC are provided. This study has made a further step toward unveiling more complex human brain connectome.
功能连接性(FC)已成为静息态功能磁共振成像(rs-fMRI)分析的主要方法。然而,以往的大多数研究都采用基于时间同步的成对FC。最近,高阶FC(HOFC)方法被提出,其理念是计算“相关性的相关性”,以捕捉脑区之间更高层次、更复杂的关联。HOFC有两种类型。第一种是(HOFC)及其变体(HOFC),用于捕捉不同层次的HOFC。与传统FC(低阶FC,或LOFC)测量原始rs-fMRI信号的相似性不同,tHOFC测量每对脑区之间LOFC轮廓(即一个区域与所有其他区域之间的一组LOFC值)的相似性。第二种是(HOFC),它通过首先计算两个成对的动态LOFC“时间序列”,然后测量它们的时间同步性(即LOFC波动的时间相关性,而不是BOLD波动)来定义每四个脑区之间的四重关系。应用表明,与LOFC相比,HOFC在疾病生物标志物检测和个体化诊断方面都具有优越性。然而,尚未有研究对不同HOFC指标的重测信度进行评估。在本文中,我们使用来自25名(12名女性,年龄24.48±2.55岁)年轻健康成年人的重测rs-fMRI数据,进行了七次重复扫描(间隔=3-8天),系统地评估了这两种HOFC方法的可靠性。我们发现所有HOFC指标都具有令人满意的可靠性,具体而言:(1)tHOFC和aHOFC为中等至良好;(2)对于具有相对较强连接强度的dHOFC为中等至一般。我们进一步深入分析了每个HOFC指标的生物学意义,并从跨层次信息交换、网络内/网络间连接以及调节性连接等方面突出了它们与LOFC的差异。此外,还研究了动态分析参数(即滑动窗口长度)如何影响dHOFC的可靠性。我们的研究揭示了以HOFC指标为特征的独特功能关联。为未来使用HOFC的应用和临床研究提供了指导和建议。这项研究朝着揭示更复杂的人类脑连接组又迈进了一步。