Abstract
Background Finding an early biomarker of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is essential to develop and implement early treatments. Much research has focused on using hippocampal volume to measure neurodegeneration in aging and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, a new method to measure hippocampal change, known as hippocampal grading, has shown enhanced predictive power in older adults. It is unknown whether this method can capture hippocampal changes at each progressive stage of AD better than hippocampal volume. The goal of this study was to determine if hippocampal grading is more strongly associated with group differences between normal controls (NC), early MCI (eMCI), late (lMCI), and AD than hippocampal volume.
Methods Data from 1666 Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative older adults with baseline MRI scans were included in the first set of analyses (513 normal controls NC, 269 eMCI, 556 lMCI, and 328 AD). Sub-analyses were also completed using only those that were amyloid positive (N=834; 179 NC, 148 eMCI, 298 lMCI, and 209 AD). We compared seven different classification techniques to classify participants into their correct cohort using 10-fold cross-validation. The following classifiers were applied: support vector machines, decision trees, k-nearest neighbors, error-correcting output codes, binary Gaussian kernel, binary linear, and random forest. These multiple classifiers enable comparison to other research and examination of the most suitable classifier for Scoring by Nonlocal Image Patch Estimator (SNIPE) grading, SNIPE volume, and Freesurfer volume. This model was then validated in the Australian Imaging, Biomarker & Lifestyle Flagship Study of Ageing (AIBL).
Results SNIPE grading provided the highest classification accuracy over SNIPE volume and Freesurfer volume for all classifications in both the full sample and amyloid positive sample. When classifying NC from AD, SNIPE grading provided an accuracy of 89% for the full sample and 87% for the amyloid positive group. Much lower accuracies of 65% and 46% were obtained when using Freesurfer in the full sample and amyloid positive sample, respectively. Similar accuracies were obtained in the AIBL validation cohort for SNIPE grading (NC vs AD: 90% classification accuracy).
Conclusion These findings suggest that SNIPE grading offers increased prediction accuracy compared to both SNIPE volume and Freesurfer volume. SNIPE grading offers promise as a means to classify between people with and without AD. Future research is needed to determine the predictive power of grading at detecting conversion to MCI and AD in amyloid positive cognitively normal older adults (i.e., early in the AD continuum).
Key points
HC grading may better classify different disease cohorts than HC volume
Higher prediction accuracy was obtained for HC grading than HC volume
HC grading offers promise as a method to detect declines in aging and Alzheimer’s
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by CIHR
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
A written data request was submitted to the adni public website. Once approved, the data was downloaded from adni.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵‡ Data used in preparation of this article were obtained from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database (adni.loni.usc.edu). As such, the investigators within the ADNI contributed to the design and implementation of ADNI and/or provided data but did not participate in analysis or writing of this report. A complete listing of ADNI investigators can be found at: http://adni.loni.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/how_to_apply/ADNI_Acknowledgement_List.pdf
Co-author details: mahsa.dadar{at}gmail.com, neda.shafiee{at}mail.mcgill.ca, louis.collins{at}mcgill.ca
Funding information Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative; This research was supported by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and a donation from the Famille Louise & André Charron.
Financial Disclosures Dr. Morrison is supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Funding Reference Number: MFE-176608.
Dr. Dadar reports receiving research funding from the Healthy Brains for Healthy Lives (HBHL), Alzheimer Society Research Program (ASRP), and Douglas Research Centre (DRC).
Neda Shafiee has no conflicts of interest to declare.
Dr. Collins reports receiving research funding from Canadian Institutes of Health research, the Canadian National Science and Engineering Research Council, Brain Canada, the Weston Foundation, and the Famille Louise & André Charron.
Conflicts of Interest The authors report no conflicts of interest.
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos