Characterizing cross‐subject spatial interaction patterns in functional magnetic resonance imaging studies: A two‐stage point‐process model

We develop a two-stage spatial point process model that introduces new characterizations of activation patterns in multisubject functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) studies. Conventionally multisubject fMRI methods rely on combining information across subjects one voxel at a time in order to identify locations of peak activation in the brain. The two-stage model that we develop here addresses shortcomings of standard methods by explicitly modeling the spatial structure of functional signals and recognizing that corresponding cross-subject functional signals can be spatially misaligned. In our first stage analysis, we introduce a marked spatial point process model that captures the spatial features of the functional response and identifies a configuration of activation units for each subject. The locations of these activation units are used as input for the second stage model. The point process model of the second stage analysis is developed to characterize multisubject activation patterns by estimating the strength of cross-subject interactions at different spatial ranges. The model uses spatial neighborhoods to account for the cross-subject spatial misalignment in corresponding functional units. We applied our methods to an fMRI study of 21 individuals who performed an attention test. We identified four brain regions that are involved in the test and found that our model results agree well with our understanding of how these regions engage with the tasks performed during the attention test. Our results highlighted that cross-subject interactions are stronger in brain areas that have a more specific function in performing the experimental tasks than in other areas.

[1]  Aila Särkkä,et al.  Modelling Tree Roots in Mixed Forest Stands by Inhomogeneous Marked Gibbs Point Processes , 2009, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[2]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Classical and Bayesian Inference in Neuroimaging: Applications , 2002, NeuroImage.

[3]  Katja Schladitz,et al.  Statistical analysis of intramembranous particles using freeze fracture specimens , 2003, Journal of microscopy.

[4]  Matthijs Vink,et al.  Revisiting multi-subject random effects in fMRI: Advocating prevalence estimation , 2012, NeuroImage.

[5]  Peter J. Diggle,et al.  Modelling the Bivariate Spatial Distribution of Amacrine Cells , 2006 .

[6]  N. Hartvig,et al.  A Stochastic Geometry Model for Functional Magnetic Resonance Images , 2002 .

[7]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[8]  Jin Fan,et al.  The activation of attentional networks , 2005, NeuroImage.

[9]  Adrian Baddeley,et al.  Practical maximum pseudolikelihood for spatial point patterns , 1998, Advances in Applied Probability.

[10]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: A primer with examples , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[11]  B. Ripley Modelling Spatial Patterns , 1977 .

[12]  Ute Hahn,et al.  Global envelope tests for spatial processes , 2013, 1307.0239.

[13]  Scott A. Sisson,et al.  Statistical Inference and Simulation for Spatial Point Processes , 2005 .

[14]  Peter J. Diggle,et al.  A comparison between parametric and non-parametric approaches to the analysis of replicated spatial point patterns , 2000, Advances in Applied Probability.

[15]  Jesper Møller,et al.  Markov chain Monte Carlo and spatial point processes , 2019, Stochastic Geometry.

[16]  Jesper Møller,et al.  Bayesian Analysis of Markov Point Processes , 2006 .

[17]  James B Leverenz,et al.  Group comparison of spatiotemporal dynamics of intrinsic networks in Parkinson's disease. , 2015, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[18]  Mari Myllymäki,et al.  Second‐order spatial analysis of epidermal nerve fibers , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[19]  C. Geyer,et al.  Simulation Procedures and Likelihood Inference for Spatial Point Processes , 1994 .

[20]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Practical Maximum Pseudolikelihood for Spatial Point Patterns , 1998, Advances in Applied Probability.

[21]  Aila Särkkä,et al.  Interacting neighbour point processes: Some models for clustering , 2001 .

[22]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Measuring structural–functional correspondence: Spatial variability of specialised brain regions after macro-anatomical alignment , 2012, NeuroImage.

[23]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Stochastic geometry models in high-level vision , 1993 .

[24]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Accurate Definition of Brain Regions Position through the Functional Landmark Approach , 2010, MICCAI.

[25]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Area-interaction point processes , 1993 .

[26]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  FSL , 2012, NeuroImage.

[27]  Rafael Malach,et al.  Conjunction group analysis: An alternative to mixed/random effect analysis , 2007, NeuroImage.

[28]  Adel Bothma A model-based statistical approach to functional MRI group studies , 2010 .

[29]  Bart Rypma,et al.  Neural and vascular variability and the fMRI-BOLD response in normal aging. , 2010, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[30]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Classical and Bayesian Inference in Neuroimaging: Theory , 2002, NeuroImage.

[31]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Dealing with the shortcomings of spatial normalization: Multi‐subject parcellation of fMRI datasets , 2006, Human brain mapping.

[32]  M. Hurn,et al.  Three-dimensional Bayesian image analysis and confocal microscopy , 2011 .

[33]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  A general statistical analysis for fMRI data , 2000, NeuroImage.

[34]  A. Särkkä,et al.  Analysis of spatial structure of epidermal nerve entry point patterns based on replicated data , 2012, Journal of microscopy.

[35]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Modeling Inter‐Subject Variability in fMRI Activation Location: A Bayesian Hierarchical Spatial Model , 2009, Biometrics.

[36]  S. Petersen,et al.  A dual-networks architecture of top-down control , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[37]  Gary K Grunwald,et al.  Mixed models for the analysis of replicated spatial point patterns. , 2004, Biostatistics.

[38]  I. Johnsrude,et al.  The problem of functional localization in the human brain , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[39]  Charles J. Geyer,et al.  Likelihood inference for spatial point processes , 2019, Stochastic Geometry.

[40]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Multilevel linear modelling for FMRI group analysis using Bayesian inference , 2004, NeuroImage.

[41]  Hal S. Stern,et al.  A Bayesian Mixture Approach to Modeling Spatial Activation Patterns in Multisite fMRI Data , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[42]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  General multilevel linear modeling for group analysis in FMRI , 2003, NeuroImage.

[43]  Alexis Roche,et al.  Anatomically Informed Bayesian Model Selection for fMRI Group Data Analysis , 2009, MICCAI.

[44]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Meta Analysis of Functional Neuroimaging Data via Bayesian Spatial Point Processes , 2011, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[45]  Michael P. Milham,et al.  A convergent functional architecture of the insula emerges across imaging modalities , 2012, NeuroImage.

[46]  Thomas J. Grabowski,et al.  Dynamic Connectivity at Rest Predicts Attention Task Performance , 2015, Brain Connect..

[47]  Alan Boyde,et al.  Analysis of a three-dimensional point pattern with replication , 1993 .

[48]  S. Petersen,et al.  Role of the anterior insula in task-level control and focal attention , 2010, Brain Structure and Function.

[49]  Ingrid Christoffels,et al.  Activated region fitting: A robust high‐power method for fMRI analysis using parameterized regions of activation , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[50]  Janine B. Illian,et al.  Gibbs point process models with mixed effects , 2009 .