Abstract
The early and accurate differential diagnosis of parkinsonian disorders is still a significant challenge for clinicians. In recent years, a number of studies have used MRI data combined with machine learning and statistical classifiers to successfully differentiate between different forms of Parkinsonism. However, several questions and methodological issues remain, to minimise bias and artefact-driven classification. In this study we compared different approaches for feature selection, as well as different MRI modalities, with well matched patient groups and tightly controlling for data quality issues related to patient motion.
Our sample was drawn from a cohort of 69 healthy controls, and patients with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease (n=35, PD), Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Richardson’s syndrome (n=52, PSP) and corticobasal syndrome (n=36, CBS). Participants underwent standardised T1-weighted MPRAGE and diffusion-weighted MRI. We compared two different methods for feature selection and dimensionality reduction: whole-brain principal components analysis, and an anatomical region-of-interest based approach. In both cases, support vector machines were used to construct a statistical model for pairwise classification of healthy controls and patients. The accuracy of each model was estimated using a leave-two-out cross-validation approach, as well as an independent validation using a different set of subjects.
Our cross-validation results suggest that using principal components analysis (PCA) for feature extraction provides higher classification accuracies when compared to a region-of-interest based approach. However, the differences between the two feature extraction methods were significantly reduced when an independent sample was used for validation, suggesting that the principal components analysis approach may be more vulnerable to overfitting with cross-validation. Both T1-weighted and diffusion MRI data could be used to successfully differentiate between subject groups, with neither modality outperforming the other across all pairwise comparisons in the cross-validation analysis. However, features obtained from diffusion MRI data resulted in significantly higher classification accuracies when an independent validation cohort was used.
Overall, our results support the use of statistical classification approaches for differential diagnosis of parkinsonian disorders. However, classification accuracy can be affected by group size, age, sex and movement artifacts. With appropriate controls and out-of-sample cross validation, diagnostic biomarker evaluation including MRI based classifiers can be an important adjunct to clinical evaluation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the Medical Research Council (SUAG/051 G101400, SUAG/058 G101400); the Wellcome Trust (103838); the Guarantors of Brain; the Raymond and Beverley Sackler Trust; the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and the Cambridge Centre for Parkinson-Plus.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
Participant consent prevents open data access but academic (non-commercial) requests for data sharing would be welcome. Please contact the senior author.
