More Shammi, Antonopoulos Georgios, Hoffstaedter Felix, Caspers Julian, Eickhoff Simon B, Patil Kaustubh R
Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain & Behaviour (INM-7), Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Neuroimage. 2023 Apr 15;270:119947. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.119947. Epub 2023 Feb 16.
The difference between age predicted using anatomical brain scans and chronological age, i.e., the brain-age delta, provides a proxy for atypical aging. Various data representations and machine learning (ML) algorithms have been used for brain-age estimation. However, how these choices compare on performance criteria important for real-world applications, such as; (1) within-dataset accuracy, (2) cross-dataset generalization, (3) test-retest reliability, and (4) longitudinal consistency, remains uncharacterized. We evaluated 128 workflows consisting of 16 feature representations derived from gray matter (GM) images and eight ML algorithms with diverse inductive biases. Using four large neuroimaging databases covering the adult lifespan (total N = 2953, 18-88 years), we followed a systematic model selection procedure by sequentially applying stringent criteria. The 128 workflows showed a within-dataset mean absolute error (MAE) between 4.73-8.38 years, from which 32 broadly sampled workflows showed a cross-dataset MAE between 5.23-8.98 years. The test-retest reliability and longitudinal consistency of the top 10 workflows were comparable. The choice of feature representation and the ML algorithm both affected the performance. Specifically, voxel-wise feature spaces (smoothed and resampled), with and without principal components analysis, with non-linear and kernel-based ML algorithms performed well. Strikingly, the correlation of brain-age delta with behavioral measures disagreed between within-dataset and cross-dataset predictions. Application of the best-performing workflow on the ADNI sample showed a significantly higher brain-age delta in Alzheimer's and mild cognitive impairment patients compared to healthy controls. However, in the presence of age bias, the delta estimates in the patients varied depending on the sample used for bias correction. Taken together, brain-age shows promise, but further evaluation and improvements are needed for its real-world application.
使用解剖学脑部扫描预测的年龄与实际年龄之间的差异,即脑龄差值,可作为非典型衰老的一个指标。各种数据表示形式和机器学习(ML)算法已被用于脑龄估计。然而,这些选择在对实际应用很重要的性能标准方面的比较情况,例如:(1)数据集内准确性,(2)跨数据集泛化能力,(3)重测信度,以及(4)纵向一致性,仍未得到明确。我们评估了128种工作流程,这些流程由从灰质(GM)图像中提取的16种特征表示形式和具有不同归纳偏差的8种ML算法组成。使用涵盖成人寿命的四个大型神经影像数据库(总数N = 2953,年龄在18 - 88岁之间),我们通过依次应用严格标准遵循了一个系统的模型选择程序。这128种工作流程在数据集内的平均绝对误差(MAE)在4.73 - 8.38岁之间,其中32种广泛抽样的工作流程在跨数据集时的MAE在5.23 - 8.98岁之间。排名前十的工作流程的重测信度和纵向一致性相当。特征表示形式和ML算法的选择都会影响性能。具体而言,体素级特征空间(经过平滑和重采样),无论有无主成分分析,结合非线性和基于核的ML算法表现良好。引人注目的是,脑龄差值与行为指标之间的相关性在数据集内预测和跨数据集预测之间存在差异。在阿尔茨海默病神经影像学计划(ADNI)样本上应用表现最佳的工作流程显示,与健康对照相比,阿尔茨海默病和轻度认知障碍患者的脑龄差值显著更高。然而,在存在年龄偏差的情况下,患者的差值估计会因用于偏差校正的样本不同而有所变化。总体而言,脑龄显示出前景,但在实际应用中还需要进一步评估和改进。