SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Determining the OPTIMAL DTI analysis method for application in cerebral small vessel disease.

Egle, M; Hilal, S; Tuladhar, AM; Pirpamer, L; Bell, S; Hofer, E; Duering, M; Wason, J; Morris, RG; Dichgans, M; et al. Egle, M; Hilal, S; Tuladhar, AM; Pirpamer, L; Bell, S; Hofer, E; Duering, M; Wason, J; Morris, RG; Dichgans, M; Schmidt, R; Tozer, DJ; Barrick, TR; Chen, C; de Leeuw, F-E; Markus, HS (2022) Determining the OPTIMAL DTI analysis method for application in cerebral small vessel disease. Neuroimage Clin, 35. p. 103114. ISSN 2213-1582 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2022.103114
SGUL Authors: Barrick, Thomas Richard

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB) | Preview
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) (Supplementary data) Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (6MB)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: DTI is sensitive to white matter (WM) microstructural damage and has been suggested as a surrogate marker for phase 2 clinical trials in cerebral small vessel disease (SVD). The study's objective is to establish the best way to analyse the diffusion-weighted imaging data in SVD for this purpose. The ideal method would be sensitive to change and predict dementia conversion, but also straightforward to implement and ideally automated. As part of the OPTIMAL collaboration, we evaluated five different DTI analysis strategies across six different cohorts with differing SVD severity. METHODS: Those 5 strategies were: (1) conventional mean diffusivity WM histogram measure (MD median), (2) a principal component-derived measure based on conventional WM histogram measures (PC1), (3) peak width skeletonized mean diffusivity (PSMD), (4) diffusion tensor image segmentation θ (DSEG θ) and (5) a WM measure of global network efficiency (Geff). The association between each measure and cognitive function was tested using a linear regression model adjusted by clinical markers. Changes in the imaging measures over time were determined. In three cohort studies, repeated imaging data together with data on incident dementia were available. The association between the baseline measure, change measure and incident dementia conversion was examined using Cox proportional-hazard regression or logistic regression models. Sample size estimates for a hypothetical clinical trial were furthermore computed for each DTI analysis strategy. RESULTS: There was a consistent cross-sectional association between the imaging measures and impaired cognitive function across all cohorts. All baseline measures predicted dementia conversion in severe SVD. In mild SVD, PC1, PSMD and Geff predicted dementia conversion. In MCI, all markers except Geff predicted dementia conversion. Baseline DTI was significantly different in patients converting to vascular dementia than to Alzheimer' s disease. Significant change in all measures was associated with dementia conversion in severe but not in mild SVD. The automatic and semi-automatic measures PSMD and DSEG θ required the lowest minimum sample sizes for a hypothetical clinical trial in single-centre sporadic SVD cohorts. CONCLUSION: DTI parameters obtained from all analysis methods predicted dementia, and there was no clear winner amongst the different analysis strategies. The fully automated analysis provided by PSMD offers advantages particularly for large datasets.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Keywords: Cognition, Dementia, Diffusion tensor imaging, Small vessel disease, Surrogate marker, 1109 Neurosciences
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute (MCS)
Journal or Publication Title: Neuroimage Clin
ISSN: 2213-1582
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
28 July 2022Published
13 July 2022Published Online
10 July 2022Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
ARUK-PG2016A-1Alzheimer’s Research UKhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002283
2015–02Stroke Associationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000364
146281National Institute for Health Researchhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272
RE/18/1/34212British Heart Foundationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000274
RG/16/4/32218British Heart Foundationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000274
A2018165FBrightFocus Foundationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100006312
R-608–000-342–213National Medical Research Councilhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001349
R-608–000-311–114Ministry of EducationUNSPECIFIED
2014 T060Dutch Heart FoundationUNSPECIFIED
016126351ZonMwhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001826
2016 T044Dutch Heart FoundationUNSPECIFIED
PubMed ID: 35908307
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/114650
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2022.103114

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item