8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of Transfer Learning and Conventional Machine Learning Applied to Structural Brain MRI for the Early Diagnosis and Prognosis of Alzheimer's Disease

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease, with 10% prevalence in the elder population. Conventional Machine Learning (ML) was proven effective in supporting the diagnosis of AD, while very few studies investigated the performance of deep learning and transfer learning in this complex task. In this paper, we evaluated the potential of ensemble transfer-learning techniques, pretrained on generic images and then transferred to structural brain MRI, for the early diagnosis and prognosis of AD, with respect to a fusion of conventional-ML approaches based on Support Vector Machine directly applied to structural brain MRI. Specifically, more than 600 subjects were obtained from the ADNI repository, including AD, Mild Cognitive Impaired converting to AD (MCIc), Mild Cognitive Impaired not converting to AD (MCInc), and cognitively-normal (CN) subjects. We used T1-weighted cerebral-MRI studies to train: (1) an ensemble of five transfer-learning architectures pretrained on generic images; (2) a 3D Convolutional Neutral Network (CNN) trained from scratch on MRI volumes; and (3) a fusion of two conventional-ML classifiers derived from different feature extraction/selection techniques coupled to SVM. The AD-vs-CN, MCIc-vs-CN, MCIc-vs-MCInc comparisons were investigated. The ensemble transfer-learning approach was able to effectively discriminate AD from CN with 90.2% AUC, MCIc from CN with 83.2% AUC, and MCIc from MCInc with 70.6% AUC, showing comparable or slightly lower results with the fusion of conventional-ML systems (AD from CN with 93.1% AUC, MCIc from CN with 89.6% AUC, and MCIc from MCInc with AUC in the range of 69.1–73.3%). The deep-learning network trained from scratch obtained lower performance than either the fusion of conventional-ML systems and the ensemble transfer-learning, due to the limited sample of images used for training. These results open new prospective on the use of transfer learning combined with neuroimages for the automatic early diagnosis and prognosis of AD, even if pretrained on generic images.

          Related collections

          Most cited references70

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Deep learning.

          Deep learning allows computational models that are composed of multiple processing layers to learn representations of data with multiple levels of abstraction. These methods have dramatically improved the state-of-the-art in speech recognition, visual object recognition, object detection and many other domains such as drug discovery and genomics. Deep learning discovers intricate structure in large data sets by using the backpropagation algorithm to indicate how a machine should change its internal parameters that are used to compute the representation in each layer from the representation in the previous layer. Deep convolutional nets have brought about breakthroughs in processing images, video, speech and audio, whereas recurrent nets have shone light on sequential data such as text and speech.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Conference Proceedings: not found

            Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              NIA-AA Research Framework: Toward a biological definition of Alzheimer’s disease

              In 2011, the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer’s Association created separate diagnostic recommendations for the preclinical, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia stages of Alzheimer’s disease. Scientific progress in the interim led to an initiative by the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer’s Association to update and unify the 2011 guidelines. This unifying update is labeled a “research framework” because its intended use is for observational and interventional research, not routine clinical care. In the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer’s Association Research Framework, Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is defined by its underlying pathologic processes that can be documented by postmortem examination or in vivo by biomarkers. The diagnosis is not based on the clinical consequences of the disease (i.e., symptoms/signs) in this research framework, which shifts the definition of AD in living people from a syndromal to a biological construct. The research framework focuses on the diagnosis of AD with biomarkers in living persons. Biomarkers are grouped into those of β amyloid deposition, pathologic tau, and neurodegeneration [AT(N)]. This ATN classification system groups different biomarkers (imaging and biofluids) by the pathologic process each measures. The AT(N) system is flexible in that new biomarkers can be added to the three existing AT(N) groups, and new biomarker groups beyond AT(N) can be added when they become available. We focus on AD as a continuum, and cognitive staging may be accomplished using continuous measures. However, we also outline two different categorical cognitive schemes for staging the severity of cognitive impairment: a scheme using three traditional syndromal categories and a six-stage numeric scheme. It is important to stress that this framework seeks to create a common language with which investigators can generate and test hypotheses about the interactions among different pathologic processes (denoted by biomarkers) and cognitive symptoms. We appreciate the concern that this biomarker-based research framework has the potential to be misused. Therefore, we emphasize, first, it is premature and inappropriate to use this research framework in general medical practice. Second, this research framework should not be used to restrict alternative approaches to hypothesis testing that do not use biomarkers. There will be situations where biomarkers are not available or requiring them would be counterproductive to the specific research goals (discussed in more detail later in the document). Thus, biomarker-based research should not be considered a template for all research into age-related cognitive impairment and dementia; rather, it should be applied when it is fit for the purpose of the specific research goals of a study. Importantly, this framework should be examined in diverse populations. Although it is possible that β-amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tau deposits are not causal in AD pathogenesis, it is these abnormal protein deposits that define AD as a unique neurodegenerative disease among different disorders that can lead to dementia. We envision that defining AD as a biological construct will enable a more accurate characterization and understanding of the sequence of events that lead to cognitive impairment that is associated with AD, as well as the multifactorial etiology of dementia. This approach also will enable a more precise approach to interventional trials where specific pathways can be targeted in the disease process and in the appropriate people.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Neurol
                Front Neurol
                Front. Neurol.
                Frontiers in Neurology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-2295
                05 November 2020
                2020
                : 11
                : 576194
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Information Engineering, University of Padua , Padua, Italy
                [2] 2Institute of Molecular Bioimaging and Physiology, National Research Council of Italy (IBFM-CNR) , Milan, Italy
                [3] 3Department of IT and Cybersecurity, Missouri State University , Springfield, MO, United States
                [4] 4Department of Science, Technology and Society, Scuola Universitaria Superiore IUSS Pavia , Pavia, Italy
                [5] 5DeepTrace Technologies S.R.L. , Milan, Italy
                [6] 6Centro Diagnostico Italiano S.p.A. , Milan, Italy
                [7] 7Department of Physics “G. Occhialini”, University of Milano Bicocca , Milan, Italy
                Author notes

                Edited by: Carl K. Chang, Iowa State University, United States

                Reviewed by: Yunfei Feng, Walmart Labs, United States; Mingxia Liu, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States; Thanongchai Siriapisith, Mahidol University, Thailand

                *Correspondence: Christian Salvatore christian.salvatore@ 123456iusspavia.it

                This article was submitted to Dementia and Neurodegenerative Diseases, a section of the journal Frontiers in Neurology

                †These authors have contributed equally to this work

                ‡Data used in preparation of this article were obtained from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database ( adni.loni.usc.edu). As such, the investigators within the ADNI contributed to the design and implementation of ADNI and/or provided data but did not participate in analysis or writing of this report. A complete listing of ADNI investigators can be found at: http://adni.loni.usc.edu/wpcontent/uploads/how_to_apply/ADNI_Acknowledgement_List.pdf

                Article
                10.3389/fneur.2020.576194
                7674838
                33250847
                7871057a-7d45-4eed-b853-345e3188ade4
                Copyright © 2020 Nanni, Interlenghi, Brahnam, Salvatore, Papa, Nemni, Castiglioni and the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 25 June 2020
                : 30 September 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, Equations: 6, References: 72, Pages: 15, Words: 12309
                Categories
                Neurology
                Original Research

                Neurology
                artificial intelligence,deep learning,magnetic resonance imaging,alzheimer's disease,mild cognitive impairment,transfer learning,cnn–convolutional neural networks

                Comments

                Comment on this article