Fractional anisotropy from diffusion tensor imaging (DTI-FA) has frequently been used to probe changes in white matter microstructure, but is also heavily affected by axonal fiber dispersion. μFA removes fiber dispersion effects and thereby estimates the microscopic anisotropy. Here, we found lower μFA in normal appearing white matter in multiple sclerosis patients as compared with healthy controls. In addition, μFA correlated significantly with age, disability and cognitive performance. These relations could not be established with DTI-FA. Our results indicate that μFA could be used as a powerful biomarker for diseases related to micro-structural changes in white matter as well as in studies of the healthy brain.
Group differences
We found remarkably different results when comparing groups with μFA and DTI-FA in the NAWM (Fig1). μFA showed clear group differences (rmANOVA, F(2,63)=9.0, p<0.001), with HC having higher μFA compared with both RRMS and PPMS patients. There were no main effect or interactions of hemisphere. With the DTI-FA, however, there were no significant main effect of group (F(2,63)=2.25, p=0.11), hemisphere (F(1,64)=0.001, p=0.98), nor group by hemisphere interaction (F(2,64)=0.06, p=0.98). So, while the μFA is able to differentiate groups, DTI-FA fails to reveal group differences in the NAWM.
Age
In both the HC and MS groups, μFA correlated negatively with age (HC left: r=-0.41, p=0.03, HC right: r=-0.58, p=0.002; MS left: r=-0.35, p=0.03, MS right r=-0.50, p=0.001). For DTI-FA, however, this relationship with age was only significant in HC (left: r=-0.55, p=0.003, right: r=-0.41, p=0.03) but not in the MS group (left: r=-0.09, p=0.59, right: r=-0.12, p=0.47) (Fig2).
EDSS
In the MS group, the μFA in right (r=-0.43, p=0.005) and left (r=-0.32, p=0.048) hemisphere both correlated negatively with EDSS, meaning that lower μFA values were associated with higher disability. This association, however, was not significant when including age as a covariate. Again, with DTI-FA, this correlation was not significant (left: r=-0.16, p=0.33; right: r=-0.22, p=0.17).
SDMT
Similarly, μFA correlated with SDMT in both MS (right: r=0.60, p<0.001; left: r=0.52, p=0.001) and HC (right: r=0.47, p=0.02; left (trend) r=0.37, p=0.06). In MS, these associations were unrelated to age as the correlations were also significant when controlling for age. With DTI-FA these correlations were not significant (HC right: r=0.22, p=0.28; HC left r=0.31, p=0.12; MS right: r=0.16, p=0.31; MS left: r=0.09, p=0.68).
Lesions
Interestingly, whole brain lesion load correlated with μFA in the NAWM (left r=-0.41, p=0.008, right r=-0.56, p=0.002) but not with DTI-FA (left r=0.21, p=0.19; right r=0.18, p=0.27).
1. Werring, D. J., Clark, C. A., Barker, G. J., Thompson, A. J. & Miller, D. H. Diffusion tensor imaging of lesions and normal-appearing white matter in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 52, 1626–1626 (1999).
2. Lim, K. O. et al. Compromised white matter tract integrity in schizophrenia inferred from diffusion tensor imaging. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 56, 367–374 (1999).
3. Yoshiura, T. et al. Diffusion tensor in posterior cingulate gyrus: Correlation with cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroreport 13, 2299–2302 (2002).
4. Klingberg, T., Vaidya, C., Gabrieli, J., Moseley, M. & Hedehus, M. Myelination and organization of the frontal white matter in children - a diffusion tensor MRI study. Neuroreport 10, 2817–2821 (1999).
5. Charlton, R. A. et al. White matter damage on diffusion tensor imaging correlates with age-related cognitive decline. Neurology 66, 217–222 (2006).
6. Scholz, J., Klein, M. C., Behrens, T. E. J. & Johansen-Berg, H. Training induces changes in white-matter architecture. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 1370–1 (2009).
7. Beaulieu, C. The basis of anisotropic water diffusion in the nervous system - A technical review. NMR Biomed. 15, 435–455 (2002).
8. Jespersen, S. N., Lundell, H., Sønderby, C. K. & Dyrby, T. B. Orientationally invariant metrics of apparent compartment eccentricity from double pulsed field gradient diffusion experiments. NMR Biomed. 26, 1647–1662 (2013).
9. Yang, G., Tian, Q., Leuze, C., Wintermark, M. & McNab, J. A. Double diffusion encoding MRI for the clinic. Magn. Reson. Med. 00, (2017).
10. Shemesh, N. et al. Conventions and nomenclature for double diffusion encoding NMR and MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 75, 82–87 (2016).
11. Lasič, S., Szczepankiewicz, F., Eriksson, S., Nilsson, M. & Topgaard, D. Microanisotropy imaging: quantification of microscopic diffusion anisotropy and orientational order parameter by diffusion MRI with magic-angle spinning of the q-vector. Front. Phys. 2, 1–14 (2014).
12. Wong, E. C., Cox, R. W. & Song, A. W. Optimized isotropic diffusion weighting. Magn. Reson. Med. 34, 139–143 (1995).
13. Mori, S. & Van Zijl, P. C. M. Diffusion Weighting by the Trace of the Diffusion Tensor within a Single Scan. Magn. Reson. Med. 33, 41–52 (1995).
14. Szczepankiewicz, F. et al. The link between diffusion MRI and tumor heterogeneity: Mapping cell eccentricity and density by diffusional variance decomposition (DIVIDE). Neuroimage 142, 522–532 (2016).
15. Szczepankiewicz, F. et al. Quantification of microscopic diffusion anisotropy disentangles effects of orientation dispersion from microstructure: Applications in healthy volunteers and in brain tumors. Neuroimage 104, 241–252 (2015).
16. Lasič, S., Szczepankiewicz, F., Eriksson, S., Nilsson, M. & Topgaard, D. Microanisotropy imaging: quantification of microscopic diffusion anisotropy and orientational order parameter by diffusion MRI with magic-angle spinning of the q-vector. Front. Phys. 2, 1–14 (2014).