首页> 外文期刊>BMC Psychiatry >Individualized diagnosis of major depressive disorder via multivariate pattern analysis of thalamic sMRI features
【24h】

Individualized diagnosis of major depressive disorder via multivariate pattern analysis of thalamic sMRI features

机译:通过丘脑SMRI特征的多变量模式分析,各种抑郁紊乱的个性化诊断

获取原文
           

摘要

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have found thalamic abnormalities in major depressive disorder (MDD). Although there are significant differences in the structure and function of the thalamus between MDD patients and healthy controls (HCs) at the group level, it is not clear whether the structural and functional features of the thalamus are suitable for use as diagnostic prediction aids at the individual level. Here, we were to test the predictive value of gray matter density (GMD), gray matter volume (GMV), amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (ALFF), and fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFF) in the thalamus using multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA). Seventy-four MDD patients and 44 HC subjects were recruited. The Gaussian process classifier (GPC) was trained to separate MDD patients from HCs, Gaussian process regression (GPR) was trained to predict depression scores, and Multiple Kernel Learning (MKL) was applied to explore the contribution of each subregion of the thalamus. The primary findings were as follows: [1] The balanced accuracy of the GPC trained with thalamic GMD was 96.59% (P??0.001). The accuracy of the GPC trained with thalamic GMV was 93.18% (P??0.001). The correlation between Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) score targets and predictions in the GPR trained with GMD was 0.90 (P??0.001, r2?=?0.82), and in the GPR trained with GMV, the correlation between HAMD score targets and predictions was 0.89 (P??0.001, r2?=?0.79). [2] The models trained with ALFF and fALFF in the thalamus failed to discriminate MDD patients from HC participants. [3] The MKL model showed that the left lateral prefrontal thalamus, the right caudal temporal thalamus, and the right sensory thalamus contribute more to the diagnostic classification. The results suggested that GMD and GMV, but not functional indicators of the thalamus, have good potential for the individualized diagnosis of MDD. Furthermore, the thalamus shows the heterogeneity in the structural features of thalamic subregions for predicting MDD. To our knowledge, this is the first study to focus on the thalamus for the prediction of MDD using machine learning methods at the individual level.
机译:磁共振成像(MRI)研究已发现主要抑郁症(MDD)中的含丘脑异常。虽然MDD患者和健康对照(HCS)之间的丘脑结构和功能存在显着差异,但目前尚不清楚丘脑的结构和功能特征是否适合用作诊断预测辅助装置个人水平。在这里,我们要测试灰质密度(GMD),灰质体积(GMV),低频波动幅度(ALFF)的预测值,以及使用多变量的丘脑中低频波动(FALFF)的分数幅度模式分析(MVPA)。招募了七十四名MDD患者和44个HC受试者。高斯工艺分类器(GPC)培训以分离HCS的MDD患者,高斯过程回归(GPR)培训以预测抑郁症分数,并应用多个内核学习(MKL)来探讨丘脑的每个次区域的贡献。主要发现如下:[1]用丘脑GMD培训的GPC的平衡准确性为96.59%(P≤≤0.001)。用丘脑GMV培训的GPC的准确性为93.18%(p≤≤0.001)。 Hamilton抑郁尺度(HAMD)与GMD培训的GPR中的评分目标和预测之间的相关性为0.90(p≤≤0.001,R2?= 0.82),并在GMV培训的GPR中,HAMD评分目标之间的相关性并且预测为0.89(p≤≤0.001,R2?0.79)。 [2]丘夫培训的模型和丘米在丘脑中培训未能鉴别HC参与者的MDD患者。 [3] MKL模型表明,左侧前梗死丘脑,右尾部颞尾,右侧感官丘脑和右侧感官丘脑有助于诊断分类。结果表明,GMD和GMV,但不是丘脑的功能指标,具有良好的MDD诊断潜力。此外,丘脑显示出用于预测MDD的丘脑亚体的结构特征中的异质性。为了我们的知识,这是第一次专注于使用个人级别的机器学习方法预测MDD的丘脑的研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号