Abstract
Automated tools have been proposed to quantify brain volume for suspected dementia diagnoses. However, their robustness in longitudinal, real-life cohorts remains unexplored. We investigated if expert visual assessment (EVA) of atrophy progression is reflected by automated volumetric analyses (AVA) on sequential MR-imaging. We analyzed a random subset of 20 patients with two consecutive 3D T1-weighted examinations (median follow-up 4.0 years, LQ-UQ: 2.1-5.2, range: 0.2-10). Thirteen (65%) with cognitive decline, the remaining with other neuropsychiatric diseases. EVA was performed by two blinded neuroradiologists using a 3 or 5-point Likert scale for atrophy progression (scores ±0-2: no, probable and certain progression or decrease, respectively) in dementia-relevant brain regions (frontal-, parietal-, temporal lobes, hippocampi, ventricles). Differences of AVA-volumes were normalized to baseline (delta). Inter-rater agreement of EVA scores was excellent (κ=0.92). AVA-delta and EVA showed significant global associations for the right hippocampus (p=0.035), left temporal lobe (p=0.0092), ventricle volume (p=0.0091) and a weak association for the parietal lobe (p=0.067). Post hoc testing revealed a significant link for the left hippocampus (p=0.039). In conclusion, the associations between volumetric deltas and EVA of atrophy progression were robust for certain brain regions. However, AVA-deltas showed unexpected variance, and therefore should be used with caution in individual cases, especially when acquisition protocols vary.
Competing Interest Statement
M.E.M. and H.W. report consultancy for Siemens Healthineers GmbH. M.E.M. unrelated consultancy for EppData GmbH. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding Statement
M.E.M. and N.S. reports funding from the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) within the framework of the Medical Informatics Initiative (MII) MIRACUM Consortium (Medical Informatics for Holistic Disease Models in Personalized and Preventive Medicine, MIDorAI; 01ZZ2020). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Commission II of Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg (approval nr.: 2017-825R-MA and 2017-828R-MA). The need for informed consent was waived because of the retrospective nature of the study. All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
