Synopsis
Statistical
power in neuroscience studies is often limited, leading to, among
others, low reproducibility of results[1]. Robust effect size
estimates over a large subject group are crucial for power
assessments. Here, we computed these estimates for microstructural
differences in splenium, body and genu of the Corpus Callosum (CC)
using diffusion MRI microstructure modeling over 100 subjects. We
fitted Tensor, Ball&Stick, NODDI and CHARMED using
GPU-accelerated software (MDT) and extracted subject specific
parameters for the CC for each model. We observe medium to large
effect sizes (Cohen’s d=1-3) for dMRI microstructure measures,
promising for power and reproducibility of dMRI microstructure
studies.Introduction
Statistical
power in neuroscience studies is often limited, leading to, among
others, overestimates of effect size in studies with low subject
numbers, low reproducibility of results, and a reduced likelihood
that a statistically significant result reflects a true effect [1].
However, to assess the power of a given study and sample size, one
needs to have an estimate of the effect size. In diffusion MRI (dMRI)
analysis, estimating the effect size is made difficult by two
challenges. First, it is often not feasible to scan many subjects,
essential for a reasonable effect size estimate. Here, we use 100
subjects of the 3T three-shell HARDI data from the HCP WU-Minn
Consortium [2] to address the sample size requirements. Second, dMRI
image analysis can require substantial computing time, especially
when using parametric biophysical compartment dMRI models like
CHARMED [3] and NODDI [4], that
can have higher specificity than diffusion tensor imaging (DTI).
Here, we use the flexible, modular GPU-accelerated Maastricht
Diffusion Toolkit (MDT; [8]) to overcome prohibitive computing times.
Using these tools, the aim of this study is to compute robust effect
size estimates and assess variability and correlation of multiple
dMRI microstructure modeling parameters focusing on the well-known
microstructural architecture of the splenium, body and genu of the
Corpus Callosum (CC).
Methods
The
100 non-related subjects 3T dataset (1.25mm isotropic, three shells
of b=1000, 2000, 3000 s/mm^2, 90 directions each and 18 b0 volumes)
from the HCP WU-Minn Consortium [2] were used for analysis in their
preprocessed form [5]. Each dataset was fitted with the following
models using MDT [8]: Tensor [6], Ball&Stick [7], NODDI [4] and
CHARMED [3]. The Ball&Stick model was initialized using an S0
fit; all the other models were initialized using the theta and phi
angles of the Ball&Stick fit. Average runtime of final model
optimization per subject using a R9 280x ATI graphics card was
00h:02m:10s (non-linear DTI), 00h:01m:30s (Ball&Stick),
00h:06m:30s (NODDI), 00h:49m:30s (CHARMED) and a total runtime of
approximately 134 hours over all subjects. A white matter skeleton
was created from the average DTI FA map in MNI-152 space using the
standard TBSS [9] pipeline and the following parameter maps were
projected to this skeleton: FA (Tensor), SF (Stick Fraction;
Ball&Stick), FR (Fraction of Restricted compartment; CHARMED),
NDI (Neurite Density Index; NODDI) and FI (Fraction of Intracellular
compartment; NODDI). Next, we aligned the JHU-ICBM-FA
Mori [10]
white
matter atlas to the skeleton and applied the skeleton mask to arrive
at a white matter parcellation map. We then extracted, for each
subject and for each projected parameter map, the mean over voxel
values for three corpus callosum regions of interests (ROIs): the
splenium (3351 voxels), body (3379 voxels) and genu (2204 voxels). We
computed mean voxel value over each of these ROIs, for each subject
and model. The ROI and parameter specific group mean, standard
deviation (StDv) and parameter correlations are reported over the 100
per-subject ROI mean values. Finally, to estimate effect sizes for CC
splenium-body-genu differences, the Cohen's d factor was computed
between the splenium-body and genu-body as: $$$\frac{\mu_1 - \mu_2}{\sqrt{(\sigma_1^2 + \sigma_2^2)/2}}$$$.
Results & Discussion
Figure
1 shows that effect sizes range from low (d=0.022 for FA genu-body)
to very high (d=3.4 for FR splenium-body). Large effect size of 1-3
can be observed for many of the differences, most consistently (for
both genu-body and splenium-body) for NDI and WIC (these are simply
related: NDI = WIC / (WIC + WEC)). Here it should be noted that high
values for normalized parameters approaching 1 could compress StDv
estimates and thus inflate effect size estimates. However, although
some values are high (e.g. FR) we observed little such ceiling
effects (see Figure 2). FS, FR and FA showed a strong effect for
splenium-body but small effect for genu-body. In figure 2, constant
value differences (intercepts) can be observed with FS<FA<FR~=NDI.
One clear outlier can be observed (NDI~=1). High between-model
correlations (slope) can be observed between FA/FS, and the triangle
FR/WIC/FA, for all three ROIs approximately equally.
Conclusion
Although
differences between models are present and intra-subject CC
differences are large, medium to large effect sizes (Cohen’s d=1-3)
are observed for advanced dMRI microstructure measures. This is
promising for power and reproducibility of dMRI microstructure
studies.
Acknowledgements
This project has received funding from the European Union‘s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement n°602450. This paper reflects only the author’s views and the European Union is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.References
1.
Katherine S. Button, John P. A. Ioannidis, Claire Mokrysz, Brian A.
Nosek,
Jonathan Flint, Emma S. J. Robinson
&
Marcus R. Munafò
Power
failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of
neuroscience Nature
Reviews Neuroscience
14, 365-376 (May 2013)
2.
David
C. Van Essen, Stephen M. Smith, Deanna M. Barch, Timothy E.J.
Behrens, Essa Yacoub, Kamil Ugurbil, The WU-Minn Human Connectome
Project: An overview, NeuroImage, Volume 80, 15 October 2013, Pages
62-79, ISSN 1053-8119
3.
Yaniv Assaf, Peter J. Basser, Composite hindered and restricted model
of diffusion (CHARMED) MR imaging of the human brain, NeuroImage,
Volume 27, Issue 1, 1 August 2005, Pages 48-58, ISSN 1053-8119,
4.
Hui Zhang, Torben Schneider, Claudia A. Wheeler-Kingshott, Daniel C.
Alexander, NODDI: Practical in vivo neurite orientation dispersion
and density imaging of the human brain, NeuroImage, Volume 61, Issue
4, 16 July 2012, Pages 1000-1016, ISSN 1053-8119
5.
M.F. Glasser, S.N. Sotiropoulos, J.A. Wilson, T.S. Coalson, B.
Fischl, J.L. Andersson, J. Xu, S. Jbabdi, M. Webster, J.R. Polimeni,
D.C. Van Essen, and Jenkinson, M. – for the WU-Minn HCP Consortium.
The minimal preprocessing pipelines for the Human Connectome Project.
NeuroImage, 80:105-124, 2013.
6.
Basser PJ, Mattiello J, LeBihan D. Estimation of the effective
self-diffusion tensor from the NMR spin echo. J Magn Reson 1994;103:
247–254.
7.
Behrens TE, Woolrich MW, Jenkinson M, Johansen-Berg H, Nunes RG,
Clare S, Matthews PM, Brady JM, Smith SM. Characterization and
propagation of uncertainty in diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Magn
Reson Med 2003;50:1077–1088.
8.
Robbert Harms, Silvia de Santis, Matteo Bastiani, Rainer Goebel,
Alard Roebroeck. Diffusion Microstructure Modelling Using a Modular
and Extensible GPU Accelerated Toolkit. E-poster presentation #3026
at ISMRM 2015 Toronto, abstract
#3656.
9.
Stephen
M. Smith, Mark Jenkinson, Heidi Johansen-Berg, Daniel Rueckert,
Thomas E. Nichols, Clare E. Mackay, Kate E. Watkins, Olga Ciccarelli,
M. Zaheer Cader, Paul M. Matthews, Timothy E.J. Behrens, Tract-based
spatial statistics: Voxelwise analysis of multi-subject diffusion
data, NeuroImage, Volume 31, Issue 4, 15 July 2006, Pages 1487-1505,
ISSN 1053-8119
10.
Mori et al., MRI Atlas of Human White Matter. Elsevier,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2005)