Matthew Christopher Murphy1, David T Jones1, Clifford C Jack1, Kevin C Glaser1, Matthew C Senjem1, Armando C Manduca1, Joel C Felmlee1, Richard C Ehman1, and John C Huston1
1Mayo Clinic, ROCHESTER, MN, United States
Synopsis
Brain stiffness is known to decrease in subjects with Alzheimer’s
disease (AD). However, previously reported stiffness estimates were heavily
weighted toward white matter. Here we investigate the sensitivity of
cortical-centric stiffness measurements for detecting AD pathophysiology, given
that the cortex is the primary site of pathology. Using a neural network-based
inversion algorithm, cortical-centric measurements are highly repeatable with
test-retest errors of less than 2% on average. With respect to AD, the medial
temporal lobe region of interest is found to best discriminate those with
dementia from cognitively normal subjects, and performs better than previously
reported methods.
Introduction
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most common dementia and its prevalence
is expected to increase as the population continues to age.1 Biomarkers are
important tools to better understand disease mechanisms, aid in early
diagnosis, and provide objective measures of therapeutic efficacy. Previous
studies have shown that global brain stiffness is reduced due to AD,2 and that stiffness
changes follow the expected regional pattern on a coarse, lobar scale.3 In these previously
employed methodologies, stiffness estimates were heavily weighted by white
matter. Given that pathology is particularly prevalent in cortical gray matter,
the purpose of this work was to investigate if stiffness estimates more heavily
weighted by cortical gray matter would be more sensitive to AD pathophysiology.
We employed a recently developed neural network-based inversion (NNI) with
improved performance in smaller, cortical-centric regions of interest (ROIs)
for this study.4Methods
First, the NNI was trained on 1 million simulated
training examples with an additional 200,000 examples used for validation.
These 3D displacement fields were each assigned a randomly chosen stiffness between
0.1 and 5 kPa with waves propagating radially from up to 10 point sources
(placed randomly outside the simulated patch), and with SNR chosen randomly between
1 and 20. The features provided to the artificial neural network included the
real and imaginary parts of the first temporal harmonic of the displacement
data in a 3x3x3 neighborhood. The network was trained with scaled conjugate
gradient backpropagation,5 stopping
when error was not reduced for 6 consecutive iterations in the validation set.
Data for this study were taken from previously completed
studies on repeatability6 and
AD,3
where details on data acquisition can be found. For each subject, a brain mask
was computed using SPM-computed segmentations, where the mask included voxels
in which the proportion of gray plus white matter was greater than
cerebrospinal fluid. Thirty-one regions of interest were defined using a
modified Automated Anatomical Labeling (AAL) atlas,7 and
were put into subject-space by applying the inverse deformation computed during
normalization. To compute gray matter stiffness in each ROI, the displacement
data were first masked by the intersection of the brain mask and atlas region.
The curl of the displacement field was then computed and smoothed using
previously described edge-aware methods.6 To
avoid evaluating the NNI with missing data, the smoothed curl images were then
“dilated” by creating a composite image equal to a smoothed curl image outside
the ROI and equal to the originally computed curl inside the ROI. Stiffness
maps were computed by evaluating the trained NNI at each voxel in the ROI, and
mean stiffness was calculated from voxels where the proportion of gray matter
was greater than that of white matter plus cerebrospinal fluid.
Test-retest
reliability was assessed in 10 volunteers who were each scanned 3 times. The
coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated for each ROI. Stiffness was then
computed in 32 cognitively normal (CN) subjects (16 amyloid-negative and 16
amyloid-positive) as well as 8 amyloid-positive subjects with probable AD. The
area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was computed for
each ROI, and compared to previously published methods.Results
The summary of test-retest repeatability is shown in Figure 1. The median
CV across all ROIs was 1.36%, comparable to previously described methods.6,8 Mean stiffness maps
in the CN and AD groups are shown in Figure 2, along with a summary of the mean
stiffness in each ROI in Figure 3. Stiffness estimates are in the expected
range and not substantially underestimated as typically observed due to partial
volume effects.6 Finally the AUROC
for differentiating CN and AD subjects for each ROI is summarized in Figure 4.
Of note, the medial temporal lobe has the greatest discriminatory power (AUROC=0.96
when left and right are averaged). This AUROC is higher than the composite
frontal/parietal/temporal lobe ROI previously reported (AUROC=0.87),3 despite the
substantially reduced ROI size.Discussion
While white matter still contributes to these results, these stiffness
estimates are more heavily weighted toward cortical gray matter based on ROI
selection. The NNI provided reliable stiffness measurements even in these small
ROIs. Interestingly the medial temporal lobe, which is known to be strongly
impacted by AD, was the most sensitive region to AD pathophysiology. This
decrease in stiffness was detectable despite the apparent overestimate of the
stiffness at the brain’s edge with NNI, based both on simulation experiments
(not shown) and visual inspection of the stiffness maps (Fig. 2). With improved
treatment of the brain’s edge, stiffness may be even more sensitive to AD
pathology than these results indicate.Acknowledgements
This
work was supported by the National Institutes of Health grant R37-EB001981.References
1 Hebert, L. E., Scherr, P. A., Bienias,
J. L., Bennett, D. A. & Evans, D. A. Alzheimer disease in the US
population: prevalence estimates using the 2000 census. Arch Neurol 60,
1119-1122, doi:10.1001/archneur.60.8.1119 (2003).
2 Murphy, M. C. et al. Decreased brain stiffness in Alzheimer's disease determined
by magnetic resonance elastography. J
Magn Reson Imaging 34, 494-498,
doi:10.1002/jmri.22707 (2011).
3 Murphy, M. C. et al. Regional brain stiffness changes across the Alzheimer's
disease spectrum. NeuroImage. Clinical
10, 283-290,
doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2015.12.007 (2016).
4 Murphy, M. C. et al. Artificial neural networks for stiffness estimation in
magnetic resonance elastography. Magnetic
resonance in medicine In press.
5 Moller, M. F. A Scaled Conjugate-Gradient
Algorithm for Fast Supervised Learning. Neural
Networks 6, 525-533, doi:Doi
10.1016/S0893-6080(05)80056-5 (1993).
6 Murphy, M. C. et al. Measuring the characteristic topography of brain stiffness
with magnetic resonance elastography. PloS
one 8, e81668,
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081668 (2013).
7 Tzourio-Mazoyer, N. et al. Automated anatomical labeling of
activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI
single-subject brain. NeuroImage 15, 273-289, doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0978
(2002).
8 Johnson, C. L. et al. Viscoelasticity of subcortical gray matter structures. Human brain mapping 37, 4221-4233, doi:10.1002/hbm.23314 (2016).