Merry Mani1, Nancy Andreasen1, and Vincent Magnotta1
1University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States
Synopsis
Schizophrenia
is a psychiatric illness characterized by failure of functional integration. To
shed light on the underlying pathophysiology, the complex networks of the brain
have to be studied comprehensively. This study used network analysis tools to
study the topological features of the brain in schizophrenia. Using diffusion
tensor imaging, we generated the graph network of schizophrenia patients and
controls. We defined 68 cortical regions as nodes and used streamlines derived
from deterministic fiber tracking to define the edges of the graph. A
permutation testing was used to test differences between topological measures
derived from the graphs of schizophrenia patients and controls.Purpose
To
report the structural connectivity results obtained from graph network analysis
in schizophrenia patients.
Methods
Schizophrenia is a psychiatric illness
characterized by a “dysmetric cognitive state”. Several disconnectivity
theories have been suggested to explain the pathophysiological mechanism
underlying schizophrenia1. Recently graph theory was introduced to
study the brain as a complex network to help map the diverse topological properties
of the brain network2. These analyses can provide insight about the
altered brain connectivity and function seen in schizophrenia.
We analyzed 48 participants with schizophrenia
and 46 control participants using a graph theory approach to study the structural
connectivity assessed using diffusion weighted imaging. MR images were
collected on 3T Siemens Tim Trio equipped with 12-channel head coil. T1-weighted anatomical images
were collected using a coronal 3D MP-RAGE sequence: TE=2.8 ms, TR = 2530 ms,
TI=909 ms, NEX=1, Flip angle=10°, Field of View=25.6x25.6x25.6 cm2 Matrix=256x256×256.
Diffusion-weighted images were gathered with the following parameters from 70
slices: TE = 82ms, TR = 8700ms, Flip angle = 90°, b-value = 1000, gradient
directions = 30, Field of View = 25.6cm2, Matrix = 128×128, bandwidth = 1395Hz,
slice thickness/gap=2.0/0.0mm. The T1-weighted images were AC-PC aligned and intensity
normalized before performing tissue classification and anatomical labeling
using fully automated BRAINS software3. Following this, the
anatomical data was parcellated into 68 cortical regions using Freesurfer4,
which were later used for defining the nodes in the diffusion data for the
graph-based network analysis. Diffusion data were first processed using DTIprep
software5 to perform adequate quality control including eddy-current
correction, head motion correction, bed vibration and pulsation, venetian blind
artifacts, as well as slice-wise and gradient-wise intensity inconsistencies. DTI
scalar maps including FA and MD were computed and whole brain fiber tracking
was performed using deterministic fiber tracking, based on the FACT (fiber
assignment by continuous tracking) algorithm as implemented in DSIStudio
software package6. Streamlines were started from 8
randomly placed seeds from each of the white matter voxels and tracking proceeded by
connecting the primary diffusion direction from one voxel to the next voxel. This procedure reconstructed all possible
fiber tracts within the brain. Fiber tracking along a streamline was terminated
when a voxel was reached with a FA < 0.1, when the streamline exited the brain
or when the fiber tract made a sharp turn > 45°. Following whole brain
tracking, the fiber tracts interconnecting pairs of regions in the 68 cortical
regions were identified for all possible pairs of cortical regions and a 68 x
68 weighted connectivity matrix was created with streamline counts as the
weights. Using the connectivity matrix, basic topological metrics of the
network including strength, modularity, clustering co-efficient and global
efficiency were computed. The above measures were normalized using 1000 random
networks that were generated using similar connectivity distribution using the
Brain Connectivity Toolbox7. The metrics were generated for each
subject and then used to test group differences between the patient and control
groups using permutation testing.
Results
As reported previously in
literature
8, the most highly connected regions in the schizophrenia as well as control population were
bilateral precuneus, superior frontal cortex, superior parietal cortex and
superior temporal cortex and insula, which formed the so-called rich-club hubs
in the network. However, contrary to previously reported findings, we did not
find reduced rich-club connectivity in the participants with schizophrenia as
compared to controls in this dataset. Instead, we find that the feeder
connections as well as the local connections are reduced in strength in our
data (see figure 1). The results of permutation testing on the topological
measures of the graph are shown in figure 2. We observed that the participants
with schizophrenia had a reduced strength of connectivity, clustering
coefficient and modularity compared to the control participants. However, only
the reduction in clustering co-efficient was statistically significant (p=0.047 corrected
after correcting for multiple comparisons).
Conclusion
Disruption
in small-world networks in structural connectivity data has been suggested in
many previous reports in schizophrenia. However, in our analysis, the only
indication of disruption of this network is the significant reduction in
clustering co-efficient in the structural connectivity data, while the
characteristic path length remains almost the same. This suggests the need for
more test-retest reliability studies on these network measures.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Friston J K, Dysfunctional connectivity in schizophrenia, World Psychiatry.
2002 Jun; 1(2): 66–71, 2. Bullmore E, Sporns O. Complex brain networks: graph
theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nat Rev Neurosc.
2009;10(3):186–198, 3. Pierson R1, Johnson H, Harris G, Keefe H, Paulsen JS,
Andreasen NC, Magnotta VA. Fully automated analysis using BRAINS: autoworkup.
Neuroimage. 2011 Jan 1;54(1):328-36, 4. Fischl B. Freesurfer. Neuroimage. 2012
Aug 15;62(2):774-81, 5. Oguz
I, Farzinfar M, Matsui J, Budin F, Liu Z, Gerig G, Johnson HJ, Styner M. Dtiprep:
quality control of diffusion-weighted images. Front Neuroinform. 2014 Jan
30;8:4, 6. http://dsi-studio.labsolver.org, 7. Rubinov M, Sporns O. Complex
network measures of brain connectivity: Uses and interpretations. Neuroimage 2010,
52:1059-69, 8. Van den Heuvel MP, Sporns O, Collin G, Scheewe T, Mandl RC, Cahn W, Goñi J, Hulshoff Pol HE, Kahn RS.
Abnormal rich club organization and functional brain dynamics in schizophrenia.
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Aug;70(8):783-92.