Synopsis
Several
cross-sectional MRI studies have shown structural differences in professional fighters but there has been no results reported in longitudinal studies of such active
fighters. The professional fighters brain health study (PFBHS) is a
longitudinal study of active professional fighters with age-matched healthy
controls using multimodal MRI methods. In this study, we show that the
features/biomarkers predicting cognitive decline at baseline are sensitive and
specific over time in our cohort of longitudinal active fighters. Our study
opens a new window to predict and monitor cognitive decline in patients with
traumatic brain injuries.Introduction
Studies have shown that both active and retired athletes with repeated
head trauma are more likely to suffer from cognitive decline
and loss of executive and attention functions when compared to age-matched
healthy controls
1, 2. Several cross-sectional MRI studies have shown
structural differences in such athletes but there has been no results reported
in longitudinal studies of such active fighters
3, 4. The
professional fighters brain health study (PFBHS) is a longitudinal study of
active professional fighters with age-matched healthy controls using multimodal
MRI methods
5. In this study, we show that the features predicting
cognitive decline at baseline are sensitive and specific over time in our
cohort of longitudinal active fighters.
Methods
Baseline Subjects: 331 subjects (21-controls
(20male (M); 30.1±8.28years), 119-boxers (108M; 29.71±7.06years),
152-mixed-martial-arts-fighters (143M; 29.05±5.04years),
22-martial-arts-fighters (19M; 28.36±5.04years) and 17-mixed-fighters (15M;
30±5.66years)) were recruited at the center. Years of education, number of
professional and amateur fights, race, gender and year of first fighting were
recorded at every visit. Each subject went through various neuropsychological
assessment tests to measure psychomotor speed (PSY) and processing (P) speed.
These scores were standardized
6 (PSYSTANS/PSTANS) and the fighters
were categorized as “impaired” (99-subjects) or “non-impaired” (211-subjects).
Timepoint1 subjects: 79 subjects
(6-controls, 19-impaired-fighters and 54-nonimpaired-fighters) were scanned
again after at-least one year.
Data
Acquisition: All subjects, at both timepoints, were scanned with a 3T
Siemens Verio scanner. Single-shot-EPI-sequence was used to acquire diffusion
weighted images (DWIs) with 71 diffusion directions and b-value of 1000 s/mm
2;
TR/TE/Resolution=7000ms/91ms/2.5mm
3. Sagittal-MPRAGE T1-weighted
images were also acquired for every subject within the same session with
TR/TE/FA/Resolution= 2300ms/2.98ms/9
o/1mm
3.
Data Processing: Standard
processing steps were used to fit diffusion tensors after eddy current
distortion correction in FSL
7. After registering each subject to
MNI152 template using tbss_2_reg and tbss_3_postreg procedures from TBSS
8,
various diffusion metrics such as fractional anisotropy (FA), axial diffusivity
(AxD), transverse diffusivity (RD) and mean diffusivity (MD) were estimated for
all the 20 major white matter (WM) tracts from JHU WM atlas
9. Using
AAL template in MNII152 space, MD was also estimated for all the 116 gray
matter AAL structures. Various other structural measures such as volume and
thickness were extracted for every subject for every label in Collin’s atlas
using Freesurfer v5.3.0
10.
Feature
selection: A total of 314 features (113 structural measurements, 196
diffusion measurements, gender, age, years of education, years of professional
fighting and type of fighters) were used for supervised feature classification
using an in-house feature selection algorithm combining least absolute shrinkage
and selection operator (LASSO)
11 and radial basis functional network
(RBFN)
12.
Relationship
between the features and the cognitive score: The mean of the extracted
features at the baseline were plotted against PSTANS and PSYSTANS to explore if
the features predicted cognitive decline in the fighters. The change in the
extracted features over time were also plotted against change (Δ) in PSTANS and
ΔPSYSTANS to explore the sensitivity and specificity of the predicted features
on cognitive decline. Nonparametric t-tests was used to perform statistical
comparisons, controlled for age and gender.
Results
Machine learning algorithm detected 6/314 features (FA of FMajor and
inferior longitudinal fasciculus (ILF), left cerebellum white matter volume,
left thalamic volume, thickness of left lateralorbitofrontal and left
medialorbitofrontal) that predicted cognitive decline in our cohorts
(prediction accuracy=0.7; Area under the curve=0.724). Mean values of all the
extracted features normalized with respect to controls is shown in the left
panel of Fig. 1. Boxplot of all the features (baseline and timepoint1) for the
3 groups (right panel of Fig. 1 and Fig 3) shows a significant decline
(p<0.05) in the values for impaired fighters as compared to nonimpaired
fighters and controls. PSTANS, ΔPSTANS, PSYSTANS and ΔPSYSTANS showed a
significant relationship (p<0.05) with the predicted features (baseline and timepoint1)
(Fig 2a, Fig 2b, Fig 4a and Fig 4b). Of note, significant difference in the
slope (p<0.05) was observed for FA of FMajor between impaired and
nonimpaired fighters (baseline and timepoint1) and left thalamic volume between
control and impaired fighters (timepoint1).
Discussion and Conclusion
Using a novel machine learning approach combining LASSO and RBFN on a
multimodal MRI dataset, our results show 6 features that predict cognitive
decline in our cohort of professional fighters. Our results also report for the
first time that the features predicting cognitive decline at baseline using
machine learning algorithm are sensitive and specific over time in our
longitudinal cohort of active professionals. The predictive features showed a
significant relationship between the neuropsychological assessment tests and hence
can be used as a surrogate to predict/monitor cognitive decline in patients
with traumatic brain injuries.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by NIH 7R01EB014284 and funding from the Lincy foundation.References
[1] Casson et al., 1984. JAMA., 251:2663-2667. [2] McKee et al., 2013.
Brain., 136:43-64. [3] Bernick and Banks., 2013. Alzheimers Res Ther., 5:23. [4]
Shin et al., 2014. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol., 35:285-290. [5] Bernick et al.,
2013. Am. J. Epidemol., 178 :280-286. [6] Williams et al., 2011. Arthritis Care
Res., 63:1178-1187.[7] Andersson et al., 2003. Neuroimage., 20:870-888. [8]
Smith et al., 2006. Neuroimage., 31:1487-1505. [9] Wakana et al., 2004.
Radiology., 230:77-87. [10] Dale et al., 1999. Neuroimage., 9:179-194. [11]
Tibshirani R., 1994. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B.,
58:267-288. [12] Orr M., 1996. http://www.anc.ed.ac.uk/~mjo/intro.ps