0912

Deconvolution of multi-echo functional MRI data with Multivariate Multi-Echo Sparse Paradigm Free Mapping
Eneko Uruñuela-Tremiño1, Stefano Moia1, Javier Gonzalez-Castillo2, and César Caballero-Gaudes1

1Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, Donostia - San Sebastián, Spain, 2Section on Functional Imaging Methods, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, United States

Synopsis

This work introduces a novel multivariate deconvolution method to blindly estimate neuronal-related -signal changes in multi-echo fMRI data without prior knowledge of their timings. In contrast to current voxel-based approaches, this algorithm simultaneously deconvolves all brain’s voxel time series and uses structured spatio-temporal regularization to improve the quality of the estimates. Besides, it employs stability selection procedures to overcome the selection of regularization parameters of the deconvolution problem. We evaluate its performance in multiple realistic simulations, showing its potential to blindly detect BOLD events in paradigms when no prior information can be obtained.

Introduction

Multi-echo (ME) fMRI collects several time-series per voxel at different echo times ($$$TE$$$) that can be utilized for increased BOLD sensitivity[1,2], and/or enhanced denoising based on the linear dependence of BOLD fluctuations with $$$TE$$$[3]. We have recently proposed a deconvolution algorithm for ME-fMRI data, named Multi-echo Sparse Paradigm Free Mapping (ME-SPFM), that blindly estimates voxelwise time-varying changes in the transverse relaxation ($$$\Delta R_2^*$$$) and the net magnetization ($$$\Delta S_0 / \bar{S}_0$$$) without prior information about neuronal-related BOLD events[4,5]. In this work, we follow up this work and propose Multivariate ME-SPFM (MvME-SPFM) that is able to operate at once in the entire brain by using $$$\mathcal{L}_1$$$- and $$$\mathcal{L}_{2,1}$$$-norm regularized estimators along with stability selection procedures. We evaluate its performance in simulations with varying noise levels and spatial configurations.

Methods

Data: A total of $$$V$$$=1500 voxels were simulated in 5 parcels ($$$L$$$=200 time-points, $$$TR$$$=2 sec.). Parcels 1-4 comprised neuronal-related $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ signals from the Total Activation Toolbox[6] that were convolved with the SPM canonical HRF to create BOLD signals, and then added random Gaussian noise (Figure 1B). Parcel 5 only included noise. The BOLD signals were linearly scaled by the corresponding $$$TE$$$s=15/35/55 ms[3,4,5]. Different signal to noise ratios (SNR) and parcels' size ratios were simulated.

MvME-SPFM: Signal percentage changes (SPC) of a voxel fMRI time series at time $$$t$$$ and $$$TE_k$$$ can be described as:

$$y\left(t,TE_k\right)=-TE_k \Delta R_2^*\left(t\right)+\Delta \rho\left(t\right),$$

where $$$\Delta \rho \left(t\right)=\Delta S_0\left(t\right)/\bar{S}_0$$$. Neglecting $$$\Delta \rho\left(t\right)$$$, we propose to solve the following multivariate regularized least squares problem to deconvolve $$$\Delta R_2^*\left(t\right)$$$:

$$\hat{\textbf{X}} = \arg \min_{\textbf{X}} \|\textbf{Y}-\bar{\textbf{H}}\textbf{X}\|_2^2+\lambda \left( \tau \left| \textbf{X} \right|_1 + \left(1-\tau\right) \left|\textbf{X} \right|_{2,1} \right),$$

where $$$\textbf{Y}\in\mathbb{R}^{N_{TE}L \times V}$$$ denote the SPC signals of all echoes (rows) and voxels (columns), $$$\textbf{X}\in\mathbb{R}^{L \times V}$$$ denote the estimates of $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$, and $$$\bar{\textbf{H}}\in\mathbb{R}^{N_{TE}L \times L}$$$ comprises convolution matrices defined by the canonical HRF per echo, each scaled by its TE[4,5]. The $$$\mathcal{L}_1$$$-norm (LASSO) $$$\left|\textbf{X}\right|_1=\sum_{t=1}^{L}\sum_{n=1}^V\left| \left(\Delta R_2^*\right)_{t,n}\right|$$$ promotes temporal sparsity of $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ estimates, whereas the $$$\mathcal{L}_{2,1}$$$-norm (GROUP LASSO) $$$\left|\textbf{X}\right|_{2,1}=\sum_{t=1}^{L}\sum_{n=1}^V \left( \left|\left(\Delta R_2^*\right)_n\right|_{2}\right)_t$$$ promotes sparse groups of estimates of $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ at time $$$t$$$ across voxels[7]. The algorithm is solved with the Fast Iterative Shrinkage Thresholding Algorithm[8]. The tradeoff parameter $$$\tau \left(0 \leq \tau \leq 1\right)$$$ is set to 0.75. Instead of selecting a fixed $$$\lambda$$$, we propose to solve the optimization problem in 100 subsamples (each with 60% of samples of the entire dataset) for a range of $$$\lambda$$$ (0.95-0.05*max($$$\lambda$$$)), and then compute the area under the curve (AUC) of the stability paths of each $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ estimate[9] (Figure 2). This yields an AUC time series per voxel. Next, AUC values are thresholded based on the 99th percentile of the AUC values of a region assumed without neuronal-related activity (parcel 5). For those values exceeding the threshold, unbiased $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ estimates are finally obtained via least squares.

Results

Figure 2 illustrates the stability paths exhibit a clearer distinction between the curves for coefficients with $$$\Delta R_2^*\neq$$$0 and $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$=0 with decreasing noise, and differences are larger for parcels 2, 3 and 4 with long blocks and/or sparse event-related $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$-changes than parcel 1 with frequent brief $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$-changes. Likewise, higher AUC values are observed in the histogram of parcel 5 with increasing noise. Figure 3 demonstrates MvME-SPFM is able to blindly deconvolve $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$-changes at the times of the simulated neuronal-related events (noise with std(n)=5), and yields accurate estimates of BOLD signal changes particularly for parcels 2, 3 and 4, and barely detects false $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$-changes in parcel 5 (i.e. high specificity). Figure 4 shows the results for 9 random voxels of each parcel, illustrating the effect of the spatial regularization of the GROUP LASSO. BOLD estimates are more accurate than $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$-estimates that tend to exhibit discontinuities within long events and deteriorate with increasing noise. Figure 5 illustrates varying the ratio of parcels’ sizes does not considerably modify the performance of the algorithm.

Discussion and conclusions

MvME-SPFM is able to accurately and blindly estimate time-series of $$$\Delta R_2^{*}$$$ from ME-fMRI data, regardless of different parcel size ratios. The proposed algorithm obtains more accurate estimates in prolonged events than in brief activations with short inter-event intervals, particularly with noisy data, and the deconvolution is better in terms of the BOLD signals. Computing the AUC of stability selection traces helps to overcome the selection of regularization parameters in the deconvolution. Future work will investigate the impact of adding $$$\Delta S_0$$$ in the model. These results demonstrate the potential of the proposed multivariate formulation to blindly detect BOLD events when no timing information is available, calling for its evaluation in real data (i.e. resting state, naturalistic paradigms).

Acknowledgements

This research was possible thanks to the support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness through the Juan de la Cierva Fellowship (IJCI-2014-20821), the “Severo Ochoa” Programme for Centres/Units of Excellence in R&D (SEV-2015-490) and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 713673. Stefano Moia has received financial support through the “la Caixa” INPhINIT Fellowship Grant for Doctoral studies at Spanish Research Centres of Excellence, “la Caixa” Banking Foundation, Barcelona, Spain. The authors would like to thank Dr. Charles Zheng, Machine Learning Team, National Institute of Mental Health, for helpful discussions on stability selection.

References

[1] Posse, S., Wiese, S., Gembris, D. , Mathiak, K. , Kessler, C. , Grosse‐Ruyken, M. , Elghahwagi, B. , Richards, T. , Dager, S. R. and Kiselev, V. G. (1999). Enhancement of BOLD‐contrast sensitivity by single‐shot multi‐echo functional MR imaging. Magn. Reson. Med., 42: 87-97.

[2] Menon, R. S., Ogawa, S. , Tank, D. W. and Uǧurbil, K. (1993). 4 Tesla gradient recalled echo characteristics of photic stimulation‐induced signal changes in the human primary visual cortex. Magn. Reson. Med., 30: 380-386.

[3] Kundu, P., Inati, S.J., Evans, J.W., Luh, W.M. and Bandettini, P.A. (2012). Differentiating BOLD and non-BOLD signals in fMRI time series using multi-echo EPI. NeuroImage, 60: 1759-1770.

[4] Caballero-Gaudes, C., Bandettini, P.A. and Gonzalez-Castillo, J. (2018). Improved detection of neuronal-related BOLD events of unknown timing with Multi-Echo Sparse Paradigm Free Mapping. ISMRM 2018. Abstract #5463

[5] Gonzalez-Castillo, J., Caballero-Gaudes, C. and Bandettini, P.A. (2018). Quantitative deconvolution of neuronal-related BOLD events with Multi-Echo Sparse Free Paradigm Mapping. ISMRM 2018, Abstract #1124.

[6] Karahanoglu, F.I., Caballero-Gaudes, C., Lazeyras, F. and Van De Ville, D. (2013). Total activation: FMRI deconvolution through spatio-temporal regularization. NeuroImage, 73: 121-134.

[7] Gramfort A., Strohmeier D., Haueisen J., Hamalainen M. and Kowalski M. (2011) Functional Brain Imaging with M/EEG Using Structured Sparsity in Time-Frequency Dictionaries. In: Székely G., Hahn H.K. (eds) Information Processing in Medical Imaging. IPMI 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6801. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

[8] Beck, A. and Teboulle, M. (2009). A Fast Iterative Shrinkage-Thresholding Algorithm for Linear Inverse Problems. SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences 2:1,183-202

[9] Meinshausen N. and Bühlmann, P. (2010). Stability selection. J. R. Statist. Soc. B. 72: 417–473.

Figures

Figure 1: A) Schematic diagram of simulated dataset with 4 parcels based on the Total Activation Toolbox[6]. A fifth parcel was simulated including only noise. Two configurations were simulated: equally-sized (Figures 3 and 4) and varying parcels' size ratios (Figure 5). B) Example of simulated signals in one voxel from each parcel with a random Gaussian noise of std(n)=5. Echo times TE=15, 35 and 55 ms are shown in orange, blue and green respectively. BOLD signals shown in dashed lines. $$$\Delta R_2^{*}$$$ signals shown in black.

Figure 2: A-C) Stability paths for different levels of noise (std(n) = 1, 5 and 10) in one random voxel from each of the 5 parcels. Curves for timepoints with $$$\Delta R_2^* \neq 0$$$ in red and $$$\Delta R_2^* = 0$$$ in black. D-F) Corresponding histograms of AUC values of parcels 1-4 in blue and parcel 5 in orange, showing lines at the maximum AUC (yellow), 99th (orange) and 95th percentiles (red). AUC histograms considered all voxels within the parcel. With std(n) = 1 the AUC histogram of parcel 5 had all AUC values equal to 0.

Figure 3: MvME-SPFM results obtained with std(n)=5. One random voxel from each of the parcels is shown. Original signal, simulated BOLD and estimated BOLD signals for TE=15 ms are shown in blue, orange and green respectively. Time-series of simulated and estimated $$$\Delta R_2^{*}$$$ are shown in black and purple, respectively, and scaled for better visualization. The algorithm tends to obtain intermittent $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$-estimates across successive time-points within long events due to the intrinsic autocorrelation of the HRF and the strict sparsity-promoting effect of the temporal regularization with the LASSO. Yet, this effect is overcome in terms of the BOLD signals.

Figure 4: MvME-SPFM results with std(n)=1 (A), 5 (B) and 10 (C). $$$\Delta R^2*$$$ and corresponding BOLD signals are shown on top and bottom figures, respectively. Each image shows 9 random voxels from each of the parcels, as well as the original simulated $$$\Delta R^2*$$$ and BOLD signal changes marked with red arrows. It can be observed that the deconvolution is nearly perfect with low noise (std(n)=1) for all types of events, but struggles with short events in parcels 1, 2 and 4 with high noise (std(n)=10). However, the algorithm still exhibits high specificity as shown in parcel 5.

Figure 5: MvME-SPFM results with random Gaussian noise of std(n)=5 for different parcel size ratios where the percentage of voxels in each parcel is (A)[0.5, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.2] (i.e. parcel 1 with frequent, brief $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ changes is the largest), (B) [0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.5, 0.2] (i.e. parcel 4 with long, strong $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ changes is the largest) and (C) [0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.6] (i.e. all parcels are equally sized, but the total volume mostly has voxels with no $$$\Delta R_2^*$$$ changes). No significant differences in the estimates are observed across the different spatial configurations.

Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 27 (2019)
0912