Synopsis
In order to identify the white matter impairment
that could lead to Alzheimer’s disease (AD), we combined computational
simulations with a graph theoretical approach. We reconstructed the structural
connectome of AD patients and healthy controls by means of diffusion tensor
imaging, and characterized the differences between the two groups using graph
theoretical measures. We then simulated neurodegeneration processes in the
controls using two different heuristic algorithms. We were able to reproduce
the AD disruption pattern in the controls, and we observed a relevant role of
the connections between hubs and peripheral regions in the simulated damaging
process.Purpose
Alzheimer’s disease (AD)
affects grey and white matter as a consequence of neuronal degeneration
processes, but such mechanisms are still poorly understood
1. Combining
computational modelling and graph theoretical approaches has been proposed as a
way to shed light on AD pathogenesis
2. In this perspective, a
generative disease model could isolate the involved areas and generate
hypothesis for new investigations. The aim of this study is to identify the
white matter pathways whose impairment could lead to AD structural patterns by simulating
neurodegeneration and using graph theory.
Methods
Forty Alzheimer’s disease patients (AD, 11M/29F,
70+/-5yo) and forty healthy controls (HC, 18M/22F, 60+/-10yo) were scanned with
a 3T MRI scanner using a 3D modified driven equilibrium Fourier transform
(MDEFT) sequence (TR=1338 ms, TE=2.4 ms, matrix=256x224, number of slices=176,
thickness=1 mm) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) (TR=7000 ms, TE=85 ms, 61
directions, b factor=1000 smm
-2, resolution=2.3 mm
3). Using
a previously described approach
3, the cortical surface was
reconstructed and parcellated into 68 regions (Desikan-Killiany atlas), then
the DTI images were used to reconstruct the white matter pathways and realigned
to overlap the parcellation scheme. Representing grey matter regions as nodes
and white matter tracts that connect them as edges, brain structural networks
were represented as weighted graphs
4. A group threshold was used in
order to reduce false positives and negatives
5. The networks were
characterized using global efficiency and overall connection strength
3.
We then simulated neurodegeneration to discover which pathways, once lesioned,
could drive the controls’ network to show patterns of AD. We modelled the
simulation as an optimization problem, using the sum of the average global
efficiency and global strength values as objective function. Using a greedy approach,
we iteratively evaluated the outcome of lesioning each edge and chose the
greatest impact edge. The algorithm was stopped when the average metrics were
equal to the average for the AD group. Since greedy strategies often lead to
only one of the possible solutions of an optimization problem, we repeated the
simulation using a genetic algorithm, where 50 random sets of 20 reduced weight
edges were used as the population. At each iteration, we performed: selection -
sets with the highest global efficiency and strength values were discarded,
crossover - new sets were creating selecting edges from the sets with the
lowest metrics, mutation - sets were randomly rearranged using edges not
present in the initial population. Using the rich-club definition from previous
studies
6, we classified the lesioned connections in rich-club,
feeder and local. We used permutation test (10000 permutations) and
network-based statistic
7 (NBS) (threshold=3.1, alpha=0.05, 10000
permutations) for group comparisons.
Results
Both global efficiency and overall connectivity
strength showed a significant decrease (p=0.0094, p=0.0150) when comparing AD
group with controls (fig. 1). The NBS analysis also showed a damaged subnetwork
with 12 affected edges (fig. 2), that included frontal and parietal connections
as well as the cingulum and the precuneus. The simulation based on the greedy
algorithm led to damaged control group (DC) with significantly decreased global
efficiency and strength (p=0.0036, p=0.0128) in comparison to the original HC
group and, by contrast, there was no significant difference with the AD group.
The edges that were damaged by the simulation involved the frontal and parietal
networks, the insula and the precuneus as well as temporal and orbital areas
(fig. 3). Ten of these connections were classified as feeder ones, three as
rich-club and four as local. In the simulations based on the genetic algorithm,
the obtained damaged control group showed also a significant decrease in both
metrics (p=0.0032, p= 0.0211) when compared
to the controls and no significant differences with patients. However, the
genetic algorithm showed a more spread out disruption pattern, that mainly
included local and feeder connections.
Discussion
Consistently with previous studies on structural
networks
8,9, we found reduced global efficiency in the AD group
compared to the controls, and we were able to reproduce this aspect in the HC
group using lesion simulations. The simulation results highlight the relevant
role of the hub regions in the structural disruption of the white matter
pathways, and particularly of the feeder connections, which constituted a large
fraction of the edges whose damage led to AD disruption pattern. Finally, the genetic
algorithm has proven more suitable than the greedy one.
Conclusion
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first
study that explores the damage process of white matter pathways in AD using
computational simulations on the connectome. Using this combined approach, our
findings show the relevant role of the pathways between hubs and peripheral
regions.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. A.T. Reid, A.C. Evans, Structural networks in
Alzheimer’s disease, European Neuropsychopharmacology, 2013; 23: 63-77. 2. B.M.
Tijms et al., Alzheimer’s disease: connecting findings from graph theoretical
studies of brain networks, Neurobiol Aging, 2013; 34: 2023-2036. 3. G. Collin
et al., Impaired rich club connectivity in unaffected siblings of schizophrenia
patients, Schizo Bull, 2013; 40(2): 438-448. 4. M. Rubinov, O. Sporns, Complex network measures
of brain connectivity: uses and interpretations, Neuroimage, 2010; 52: 1059-1069.
5. M.A. de Reus, M.P. van den Heuvel, Estimating false positives and negatives
in brain networks, Neuroimage, 2013; 70: 402-40. 6. M.P. van den Heuvel, O.
Sporns, Rich-club organization of the human connectome, J Neurosci, 2011; 31(44):
15775-786. 7. A. Zalesky, A. Fornito, E.T. Bullmore, Network-based statistic:
Identifying differences in brain networks, Neuroimage, 2010; 53(4): 1197-1207.
8. C.Y. Lo et al., Diffusion tensor tractography reveals abnormal topological
organization in structural cortical networks in Alzheimer’s disease, J
Neurosci, 2010; 30(50): 16876-885. 9. F.U. Fischer et al., Altered whole-brain
white matter networks in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease, Neuroimage: clinical,
2015; 8: 660-666.