TY - JOUR
T1 - MRI data-driven algorithm for the diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia
AU - Manera, Ana L.
AU - Dadar, Mahsa
AU - FTLDNI Investigators, GENFI Consortium
AU - Van Swieten, John Cornelis
AU - Borroni, Barbara
AU - Sanchez-Valle, Raquel
AU - Moreno, Fermin
AU - Laforce, Robert
AU - Graff, Caroline
AU - Synofzik, Matthis
AU - Galimberti, Daniela
AU - Rowe, James Benedict
AU - Masellis, Mario
AU - Tartaglia, Maria Carmela
AU - Finger, Elizabeth
AU - Vandenberghe, Rik
AU - de Mendonca, Alexandre
AU - Tagliavini, Fabrizio
AU - Santana, Isabel
AU - Butler, Christopher R.
AU - Gerhard, Alex
AU - Danek, Adrian
AU - Levin, Johannes
AU - Otto, Markus
AU - Frisoni, Giovanni
AU - Ghidoni, Roberta
AU - Sorbi, Sandro
AU - Rohrer, Jonathan Daniel
AU - Ducharme, Simon
AU - Louis Collins, D.
AU - Jiskoot, Lize
AU - Meeter, Lieke
AU - van Minkelen, Rick
AU - Panman, Jessica
AU - Papma, Janne
N1 - Funding:
Data collection and sharing for this project was funded by the
Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Neuroimaging Initiative (National Institutes of
Health Grant R01 AG032306). The study is coordinated through the University of
California, San Francisco, Memory and Aging Center. FTLDNI data are disseminated
by the Laboratory for Neuro Imaging at the University of Southern California. Brain
scan acquisition at the McConnell Brain Imaging was supported by the Brain Canada
Foundation with support from Health Canada and the Canada Foundation for
Innovation (CFI Project 34874). This work was supported by Italian Ministry of Health
(CoEN015 and Ricerca Corrente).
Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2021/6/1
Y1 - 2021/6/1
N2 - Introduction Structural brain imaging is paramount for the diagnosis of behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), but it has low sensitivity leading to erroneous or late diagnosis. Methods A total of 515 subjects from two different bvFTD cohorts (training and independent validation cohorts) were used to perform voxel-wise morphometric analysis to identify regions with significant differences between bvFTD and controls. A random forest classifier was used to individually predict bvFTD from deformation-based morphometry differences in isolation and together with semantic fluency. Tenfold cross validation was used to assess the performance of the classifier within the training cohort. A second held-out cohort of genetically confirmed bvFTD cases was used for additional validation. Results Average 10-fold cross-validation accuracy was 89% (82% sensitivity, 93% specificity) using only MRI and 94% (89% sensitivity, 98% specificity) with the addition of semantic fluency. In the separate validation cohort of definite bvFTD, accuracy was 88% (81% sensitivity, 92% specificity) with MRI and 91% (79% sensitivity, 96% specificity) with added semantic fluency scores. Conclusion Our results show that structural MRI and semantic fluency can accurately predict bvFTD at the individual subject level within a completely independent validation cohort coming from a different and independent database.
AB - Introduction Structural brain imaging is paramount for the diagnosis of behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), but it has low sensitivity leading to erroneous or late diagnosis. Methods A total of 515 subjects from two different bvFTD cohorts (training and independent validation cohorts) were used to perform voxel-wise morphometric analysis to identify regions with significant differences between bvFTD and controls. A random forest classifier was used to individually predict bvFTD from deformation-based morphometry differences in isolation and together with semantic fluency. Tenfold cross validation was used to assess the performance of the classifier within the training cohort. A second held-out cohort of genetically confirmed bvFTD cases was used for additional validation. Results Average 10-fold cross-validation accuracy was 89% (82% sensitivity, 93% specificity) using only MRI and 94% (89% sensitivity, 98% specificity) with the addition of semantic fluency. In the separate validation cohort of definite bvFTD, accuracy was 88% (81% sensitivity, 92% specificity) with MRI and 91% (79% sensitivity, 96% specificity) with added semantic fluency scores. Conclusion Our results show that structural MRI and semantic fluency can accurately predict bvFTD at the individual subject level within a completely independent validation cohort coming from a different and independent database.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102678202&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/jnnp-2020-324106
DO - 10.1136/jnnp-2020-324106
M3 - Article
C2 - 33722819
AN - SCOPUS:85102678202
SN - 0022-3050
VL - 92
SP - 608
EP - 616
JO - Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
JF - Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
IS - 6
ER -