MIDAS: Regionally linear multivariate discriminative statistical mapping

ABSTRACT Statistical parametric maps formed via voxel‐wise mass‐univariate tests, such as the general linear model, are commonly used to test hypotheses about regionally specific effects in neuroimaging cross‐sectional studies where each subject is represented by a single image. Despite being informative, these techniques remain limited as they ignore multivariate relationships in the data. Most importantly, the commonly employed local Gaussian smoothing, which is important for accounting for registration errors and making the data follow Gaussian distributions, is usually chosen in an ad hoc fashion. Thus, it is often suboptimal for the task of detecting group differences and correlations with non‐imaging variables. Information mapping techniques, such as searchlight, which use pattern classifiers to exploit multivariate information and obtain more powerful statistical maps, have become increasingly popular in recent years. However, existing methods may lead to important interpretation errors in practice (i.e., misidentifying a cluster as informative, or failing to detect truly informative voxels), while often being computationally expensive. To address these issues, we introduce a novel efficient multivariate statistical framework for cross‐sectional studies, termed MIDAS, seeking highly sensitive and specific voxel‐wise brain maps, while leveraging the power of regional discriminant analysis. In MIDAS, locally linear discriminative learning is applied to estimate the pattern that best discriminates between two groups, or predicts a variable of interest. This pattern is equivalent to local filtering by an optimal kernel whose coefficients are the weights of the linear discriminant. By composing information from all neighborhoods that contain a given voxel, MIDAS produces a statistic that collectively reflects the contribution of the voxel to the regional classifiers as well as the discriminative power of the classifiers. Critically, MIDAS efficiently assesses the statistical significance of the derived statistic by analytically approximating its null distribution without the need for computationally expensive permutation tests. The proposed framework was extensively validated using simulated atrophy in structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and further tested using data from a task‐based functional MRI study as well as a structural MRI study of cognitive performance. The performance of the proposed framework was evaluated against standard voxel‐wise general linear models and other information mapping methods. The experimental results showed that MIDAS achieves relatively higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting group differences. Together, our results demonstrate the potential of the proposed approach to efficiently map effects of interest in both structural and functional data. HIGHLIGHTSWe present a novel statistical mapping framework for the analysis of neuroimaging studies.Proposed statistic involves regional activations and discriminative margins.P‐values are analytically estimated using approximations of permutation testing.The proposed method is applied to a functional study of truth‐telling and deception as well as a structural study of aging.

[1]  Martha Elizabeth Shenton,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometric Analysis of Gray Matter in First Episode Schizophrenia , 2002, NeuroImage.

[2]  K. Davis,et al.  The Alzheimer's disease assessment scale: an instrument for assessing treatment efficacy. , 1983, Psychopharmacology bulletin.

[3]  R. Gur,et al.  Telling truth from lie in individual subjects with fast event‐related fMRI , 2005, Human brain mapping.

[4]  Polina Golland,et al.  Detecting stable distributed patterns of brain activation using Gini contrast , 2011, NeuroImage.

[5]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  ODVBA: Optimally-Discriminative Voxel-Based Analysis , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  Ethem Alpaydin,et al.  Multiple Kernel Learning Algorithms , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[7]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Permutation inference for the general linear model , 2014, NeuroImage.

[8]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  Optimally-Discriminative Voxel-Based Morphometry significantly increases the ability to detect group differences in schizophrenia, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease , 2013, NeuroImage.

[9]  Yong Zhang,et al.  Brain structural abnormalities in survivors of pediatric posterior fossa brain tumors: A voxel-based morphometry study using free-form deformation , 2008, NeuroImage.

[10]  Eve C. Johnstone,et al.  Structural Gray Matter Differences between First-Episode Schizophrenics and Normal Controls Using Voxel-Based Morphometry , 2002, NeuroImage.

[11]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  On the interpretation of weight vectors of linear models in multivariate neuroimaging , 2014, NeuroImage.

[12]  Dinggang Shen,et al.  Very High-Resolution Morphometry Using Mass-Preserving Deformations and HAMMER Elastic Registration , 2003, NeuroImage.

[13]  Nick C Fox,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging predictors of cognition in mild cognitive impairment. , 2007, Archives of neurology.

[14]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[15]  Francisco Pereira,et al.  Information mapping with pattern classifiers: A comparative study , 2011, NeuroImage.

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

[17]  Derek K. Jones,et al.  The effect of filter size on VBM analyses of DT-MRI data , 2005, NeuroImage.

[18]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Why Voxel-Based Morphometry Should Be Used , 2001, NeuroImage.

[19]  B. Everitt,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[20]  Norbert Schuff,et al.  Deformation tensor morphometry of semantic dementia with quantitative validation , 2004, NeuroImage.

[21]  Bilwaj Gaonkar,et al.  Analytic estimation of statistical significance maps for support vector machine based multi-variate image analysis and classification , 2013, NeuroImage.

[22]  Mert R. Sabuncu,et al.  Spatiotemporal Linear Mixed Effects Modeling for the Mass-univariate Analysis of Longitudinal Neuroimage Data ⁎ for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 1 , 2022 .

[23]  Aixia Guo,et al.  Gene Selection for Cancer Classification using Support Vector Machines , 2014 .

[24]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[25]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometry Using the RAVENS Maps: Methods and Validation Using Simulated Longitudinal Atrophy , 2001, NeuroImage.

[26]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Information-based functional brain mapping. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Eve C. Johnstone,et al.  Grey matter changes over time in high risk subjects developing schizophrenia , 2005, NeuroImage.

[28]  Ender Konukoglu,et al.  Relevant feature set estimation with a knock-out strategy and random forests , 2015, NeuroImage.

[29]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Searchlight analysis: Promise, pitfalls, and potential , 2013, NeuroImage.

[30]  Russell A. Poldrack,et al.  Orthogonalization of Regressors in fMRI Models , 2015, PloS one.

[31]  Ramon Casanova,et al.  Biological parametric mapping: A statistical toolbox for multimodality brain image analysis , 2007, NeuroImage.

[32]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Identifying Global Anatomical Differences: Deformation-Based Morphometry , 1998, NeuroImage.

[33]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[34]  D. Louis Collins,et al.  Whole-brain voxel-based statistical analysis of gray matter and white matter in temporal lobe epilepsy , 2004, NeuroImage.

[35]  J. Gore,et al.  Multiplicative intrinsic component optimization (MICO) for MRI bias field estimation and tissue segmentation. , 2014, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[36]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Growth patterns in the developing brain detected by using continuum mechanical tensor maps , 2000, Nature.

[37]  Paolo Avesani,et al.  Brain Decoding: Biases in Error Estimation , 2010, 2010 First Workshop on Brain Decoding: Pattern Recognition Challenges in Neuroimaging.

[38]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  Bootstrap Methods for Standard Errors, Confidence Intervals, and Other Measures of Statistical Accuracy , 1986 .

[39]  Olivier Ledoit,et al.  Improved estimation of the covariance matrix of stock returns with an application to portfolio selection , 2003 .

[40]  Paul M. Thompson,et al.  3D pattern of brain abnormalities in Williams syndrome visualized using tensor-based morphometry , 2007, NeuroImage.

[41]  Michael Weiner,et al.  Tensor-based morphometry as a neuroimaging biomarker for Alzheimer's disease: An MRI study of 676 AD, MCI, and normal subjects , 2008, NeuroImage.

[42]  S. Resnick,et al.  An image-processing system for qualitative and quantitative volumetric analysis of brain images. , 1998, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[43]  John-Dylan Haynes,et al.  Searchlight-based multi-voxel pattern analysis of fMRI by cross-validated MANOVA , 2014, NeuroImage.

[44]  Bilwaj Gaonkar,et al.  Multi-atlas skull-stripping. , 2013, Academic radiology.

[45]  Lars Kai Hansen,et al.  Model sparsity and brain pattern interpretation of classification models in neuroimaging , 2012, Pattern Recognit..

[46]  Nathan Srebro,et al.  Explicit Approximations of the Gaussian Kernel , 2011, ArXiv.

[47]  Johan Wessberg,et al.  A Monte Carlo method for locally multivariate brain mapping , 2011, NeuroImage.

[48]  Bilwaj Gaonkar,et al.  Interpreting support vector machine models for multivariate group wise analysis in neuroimaging , 2015, Medical Image Anal..

[49]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  3D Anatomical Atlas of the Human Brain , 1998, NeuroImage.

[50]  Nikos Paragios,et al.  DRAMMS: Deformable Registration via Attribute Matching and Mutual-Saliency Weighting , 2009, IPMI.

[51]  Dinggang Shen,et al.  Classifying spatial patterns of brain activity with machine learning methods: Application to lie detection , 2005, NeuroImage.

[52]  M. Cugmas,et al.  On comparing partitions , 2015 .

[53]  Kiralee M. Hayashi,et al.  Generalized Tensor-Based Morphometry of HIV / AIDS Using Multivariate Statistics on Strain Matrices , 2006 .

[54]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometry—The Methods , 2000, NeuroImage.

[55]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A Voxel-Based Method for the Statistical Analysis of Gray and White Matter Density Applied to Schizophrenia , 1995, NeuroImage.

[56]  V. Calhoun,et al.  Voxel-based morphometry versus region of interest: a comparison of two methods for analyzing gray matter differences in schizophrenia , 2005, Schizophrenia Research.

[57]  Johan A. K. Suykens,et al.  Least Squares Support Vector Machine Classifiers , 1999, Neural Processing Letters.

[58]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  A Unified Statistical Approach to Deformation-Based Morphometry , 2001, NeuroImage.

[59]  Nick C Fox,et al.  Imaging of onset and progression of Alzheimer's disease with voxel-compression mapping of serial magnetic resonance images , 2001, The Lancet.

[60]  John Shawe-Taylor,et al.  SCoRS—A Method Based on Stability for Feature Selection and Mapping in Neuroimaging , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[61]  Moo K. Chung,et al.  Deformation-based surface morphometry applied to gray matter deformation , 2003, NeuroImage.

[62]  V. Calhoun,et al.  A large scale (N =400) investigation of gray matter differences in schizophrenia using optimized voxel-based morphometry , 2008, Schizophrenia Research.

[63]  Didier Dormont,et al.  Spatial Regularization of Svm for the Detection of Diffusion Alterations Associated with Stroke Outcome , 2022 .