Toward a connectivity gradient-based framework for reproducible biomarker discovery

Despite myriad demonstrations of feasibility, the high dimensionality of fMRI data remains a critical barrier to its utility for reproducible biomarker discovery. Recent efforts to address this challenge have capitalized on dimensionality reduction techniques applied to resting-state fMRI, identifying principal components of intrinsic connectivity which describe smooth transitions across different cortical systems, so called "connectivity gradients". These gradients recapitulate neurocognitively meaningful organizational principles that are present in both human and primate brains, and also appear to differ among individuals and clinical populations. Here, we provide a critical assessment of the suitability of connectivity gradients for biomarker discovery. Using the Human Connectome Project (discovery subsample=209; two replication subsamples= 209 × 2) and the Midnight scan club (n=9), we tested the following key biomarker traits - reliability, reproducibility and predictive validity - of functional gradients. In doing so, we systematically assessed the effects of three analytical settings, including i) dimensionality reduction algorithms (i.e., linear vs. non-linear methods), ii) input data types (i.e., raw time series, [un-]thresholded functional connectivity), and iii) amount of the data (resting-state fMRI time-series lengths). We found that the reproducibility of functional gradients across algorithms and subsamples is generally higher for those explaining more variances of whole-brain connectivity data, as well as those having higher reliability. Notably, among different analytical settings, a linear dimensionality reduction (principal component analysis in our study), more conservatively thresholded functional connectivity (e.g., 95-97%) and longer time-series data (at least ≥20mins) was found to be preferential conditions to obtain higher reliability. Those gradients with higher reliability were able to predict unseen phenotypic scores with a higher accuracy, highlighting reliability as a critical prerequisite for validity. Importantly, prediction accuracy with connectivity gradients exceeded that observed with more traditional edge-based connectivity measures, suggesting the added value of a low-dimensional and multivariate gradient approach. Finally, the present work highlights the importance and benefits of systematically exploring the parameter space for new imaging methods before widespread deployment.

[1]  O. Sporns,et al.  A cross-disorder connectome landscape of brain dysconnectivity , 2019, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[2]  Ann B. Lee,et al.  Geometric diffusions as a tool for harmonic analysis and structure definition of data: diffusion maps. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience , 2013, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[4]  Dustin Scheinost,et al.  A decade of test-retest reliability of functional connectivity: A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2019, NeuroImage.

[5]  Guillén Fernández,et al.  The functional organisation of the hippocampus along its long axis is gradual and predicts recollection , 2018 .

[6]  Xi-Nian Zuo,et al.  Assessing Variations in Areal Organization for the Intrinsic Brain: From Fingerprints to Reliability , 2016, bioRxiv.

[7]  A. McIntosh,et al.  Multivariate statistical analyses for neuroimaging data. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[8]  Ting Xu,et al.  Bagging improves reproducibility of functional parcellation of the human brain , 2018, NeuroImage.

[9]  M. Mesulam,et al.  From sensation to cognition. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[10]  Evan M. Gordon,et al.  Precision Functional Mapping of Individual Human Brains , 2017, Neuron.

[11]  Xi-Nian Zuo,et al.  Harnessing reliability for neuroscience research , 2019, Nature Human Behaviour.

[12]  Koen V. Haak,et al.  Connectopic mapping with resting-state fMRI , 2016, NeuroImage.

[13]  Ahmad R. Hariri,et al.  General functional connectivity: Shared features of resting-state and task fMRI drive reliable and heritable individual differences in functional brain networks , 2018, NeuroImage.

[14]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[15]  Polina Golland,et al.  Decoupling function and anatomy in atlases of functional connectivity patterns: Language mapping in tumor patients , 2014, NeuroImage.

[16]  R Cameron Craddock,et al.  A whole brain fMRI atlas generated via spatially constrained spectral clustering , 2012, Human brain mapping.

[17]  Maurizio Corbetta,et al.  The human brain is intrinsically organized into dynamic, anticorrelated functional networks. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  Reinder Vos de Wael,et al.  Atypical functional connectome hierarchy in autism , 2018, Nature Communications.

[19]  Hao-Ting Wang,et al.  Modes of operation: A topographic neural gradient supporting stimulus dependent and independent cognition , 2019, NeuroImage.

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

[21]  Michael P. Milham,et al.  Bagging improves reproducibility of functional parcellation of the human brain , 2020, NeuroImage.

[22]  Claus C. Hilgetag,et al.  ‘Hierarchy’ in the organization of brain networks , 2020, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.

[23]  Saad Jbabdi,et al.  Connectivity Fingerprints: From Areal Descriptions to Abstract Spaces , 2018, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[24]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[25]  Dustin Scheinost,et al.  Influences on the Test–Retest Reliability of Functional Connectivity MRI and its Relationship with Behavioral Utility , 2017, Cerebral cortex.

[26]  Dustin Scheinost,et al.  The (in)stability of functional brain network measures across thresholds , 2015, NeuroImage.

[27]  O. Sporns,et al.  Rich-Club Organization of the Human Connectome , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  Elizabeth Jefferies,et al.  Situating the default-mode network along a principal gradient of macroscale cortical organization , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[30]  Marisa O. Hollinshead,et al.  The organization of the human cerebral cortex estimated by intrinsic functional connectivity. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[31]  J. Duncan The multiple-demand (MD) system of the primate brain: mental programs for intelligent behaviour , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[32]  R. Gur,et al.  Functional Brain Imaging in Neuropsychology Over the Past 25 Years , 2017, Neuropsychology.

[33]  Carey E. Priebe,et al.  Big Data Reproducibility: Applications in Brain Imaging and Genomics , 2020 .

[34]  Mary E. Meyerand,et al.  The effect of scan length on the reliability of resting-state fMRI connectivity estimates , 2013, NeuroImage.

[35]  Timothy O. Laumann,et al.  An approach for parcellating human cortical areas using resting-state correlations , 2014, NeuroImage.

[36]  R. Passingham,et al.  Whole brain comparative anatomy using connectivity blueprints , 2018, bioRxiv.

[37]  V. Menon Large-scale brain networks and psychopathology: a unifying triple network model , 2011, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[38]  G. Glover,et al.  Resting-State Functional Connectivity in Major Depression: Abnormally Increased Contributions from Subgenual Cingulate Cortex and Thalamus , 2007, Biological Psychiatry.

[39]  Michael P. Milham,et al.  Measuring strengths and weaknesses in dimensional psychiatry , 2019, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[40]  Mikhail Belkin,et al.  Laplacian Eigenmaps for Dimensionality Reduction and Data Representation , 2003, Neural Computation.

[41]  Daniel S. Margulies,et al.  BrainSpace: a toolbox for the analysis of macroscale gradients in neuroimaging and connectomics datasets , 2019, Communications Biology.

[42]  Dustin Scheinost,et al.  Using connectome-based predictive modeling to predict individual behavior from brain connectivity , 2017, Nature Protocols.

[43]  X. Zuo,et al.  Test-retest reliabilities of resting-state FMRI measurements in human brain functional connectomics: A systems neuroscience perspective , 2014, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[44]  Xi-Nian Zuo,et al.  A Connectome Computation System for discovery science of brain , 2015 .

[45]  Mark Jenkinson,et al.  The minimal preprocessing pipelines for the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[46]  Stéphane Lafon,et al.  Diffusion maps , 2006 .

[47]  D. Margulies,et al.  Default mode network can support the level of detail in experience during active task states , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  Damien A. Fair,et al.  Defining functional areas in individual human brains using resting functional connectivity MRI , 2008, NeuroImage.

[49]  Evan M. Gordon,et al.  Local-Global Parcellation of the Human Cerebral Cortex From Intrinsic Functional Connectivity MRI , 2017, bioRxiv.

[50]  B. Leventhal,et al.  Unraveling the Miswired Connectome: A Developmental Perspective , 2014, Neuron.

[51]  Hao-Ting Wang,et al.  Finding the needle in high-dimensional haystack: A tutorial on canonical correlation analysis , 2018, ArXiv.

[52]  Ludovica Griffanti,et al.  Automatic denoising of functional MRI data: Combining independent component analysis and hierarchical fusion of classifiers , 2014, NeuroImage.

[53]  Jonathan D. Power,et al.  Multi-task connectivity reveals flexible hubs for adaptive task control , 2013, Nature Neuroscience.

[54]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  A positive-negative mode of population covariation links brain connectivity, demographics and behavior , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[55]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Resting-state fMRI in the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[56]  Boris C. Bernhardt,et al.  BrainSpace: a toolbox for the analysis of macroscale gradients in neuroimaging and connectomics datasets , 2020, Communications Biology.

[57]  O. Sporns,et al.  Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems , 2009, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[58]  Guillén Fernández,et al.  The functional organisation of the hippocampus along its long axis is gradual and predicts recollection , 2018, Cortex.

[59]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Function in the human connectome: Task-fMRI and individual differences in behavior , 2013, NeuroImage.

[60]  Hao-Ting Wang,et al.  Distant from input: Evidence of regions within the default mode network supporting perceptually-decoupled and conceptually-guided cognition , 2018, NeuroImage.

[61]  Polina Golland,et al.  Identifying Shared Brain Networks in Individuals by Decoupling Functional and Anatomical Variability. , 2016, Cerebral cortex.

[62]  M. Catani,et al.  The rises and falls of disconnection syndromes. , 2005, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[63]  Sridhar Mahadevan,et al.  Manifold alignment using Procrustes analysis , 2008, ICML '08.

[64]  Christian F. Doeller,et al.  Functional topography of the human entorhinal cortex , 2015, eLife.

[65]  Koen V. Haak,et al.  Functional corticostriatal connection topographies predict goal directed behaviour in humans , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[66]  Christopher D. Chambers,et al.  Redefine statistical significance , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[67]  V. Calhoun,et al.  Aberrant "default mode" functional connectivity in schizophrenia. , 2007, The American journal of psychiatry.

[68]  Reinder Vos de Wael,et al.  Anatomical and microstructural determinants of hippocampal subfield functional connectome embedding , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[69]  R. Cameron Craddock,et al.  Clinical applications of the functional connectome , 2013, NeuroImage.