Advertisement

The Cerebellum

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 887–895 | Cite as

Principal Component Analysis of Cerebellar Shape on MRI Separates SCA Types 2 and 6 into Two Archetypal Modes of Degeneration

  • Brian C. Jung
  • Soo I. Choi
  • Annie X. Du
  • Jennifer L. Cuzzocreo
  • Zhuo Z. Geng
  • Howard S. Ying
  • Susan L. Perlman
  • Arthur W. Toga
  • Jerry L. Prince
  • Sarah H. Ying
Original Paper

Abstract

Although “cerebellar ataxia” is often used in reference to a disease process, presumably there are different underlying pathogenetic mechanisms for different subtypes. Indeed, spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) types 2 and 6 demonstrate complementary phenotypes, thus predicting a different anatomic pattern of degeneration. Here, we show that an unsupervised classification method, based on principal component analysis (PCA) of cerebellar shape characteristics, can be used to separate SCA2 and SCA6 into two classes, which may represent disease-specific archetypes. Patients with SCA2 (n = 11) and SCA6 (n = 7) were compared against controls (n = 15) using PCA to classify cerebellar anatomic shape characteristics. Within the first three principal components, SCA2 and SCA6 differed from controls and from each other. In a secondary analysis, we studied five additional subjects and found that these patients were consistent with the previously defined archetypal clusters of clinical and anatomical characteristics. Secondary analysis of five subjects with related diagnoses showed that disease groups that were clinically and pathophysiologically similar also shared similar anatomic characteristics. Specifically, Archetype #1 consisted of SCA3 (n = 1) and SCA2, suggesting that cerebellar syndromes accompanied by atrophy of the pons may be associated with a characteristic pattern of cerebellar neurodegeneration. In comparison, Archetype #2 was comprised of disease groups with pure cerebellar atrophy (episodic ataxia type 2 (n = 1), idiopathic late-onset cerebellar ataxias (n = 3), and SCA6). This suggests that cerebellar shape analysis could aid in discriminating between different pathologies. Our findings further suggest that magnetic resonance imaging is a promising imaging biomarker that could aid in the diagnosis and therapeutic management in patients with cerebellar syndromes.

Keywords

Ataxia Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Principal component analysis (PCA) Cerebellum Biomarker 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Arnold-Chiari Foundation, the Robin Zee Fund, the Dana Foundation Program for Brain and Immuno-Imaging, the Research to Prevent Blindness Core Grant, and the National Institutes of Health (grant numbers 1K23EY015802, 5T32DC00023, 5T32MH019950, 5T32GM007057, R01 EY01849, 1R01NS056307, R01NS054255, 5RC1NS068897, 5R01EY019347, and 5R21NS059830). We would also like to thank Mimi Lee and Elizabeth Murray for their technical assistance.

Conflicts of interest

There is no financial interest to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Manto M-U, Pandolfo M. The cerebellum and its disorders. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University; 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Perlman S. Evaluation and management of ataxic disorders. An overview for physicians. Minneapolis: National Ataxia Foundation; 2007.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ying SH, Choi SI, Lee M, Perlman SL, Baloh RW, Toga AW, et al. Relative atrophy of the flocculus and ocular motor dysfunction in SCA2 and SCA6. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005;1039:430–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jung BC, Choi SI, Du AX, Cuzzocreo JL, Ying HS, Landman BA, et al. MRI shows a region-specific pattern of atrophy in spinocerebellar ataxia type 2. Cerebellum [Internet]. 18 Aug 2011 [cited 11 Oct 2011]. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21850525.
  5. 5.
    Subramony SH, May W, Lynch D, Gomez C, Fischbeck K, Hallett M, et al. Measuring Friedreich ataxia: interrater reliability of a neurologic rating scale. Neurology. 2005;64(7):1261–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ying SH, Choi SI, Perlman SL, Baloh RW, Zee DS, Toga AW. Pontine and cerebellar atrophy correlate with clinical disability in SCA2. Neurology. 2006;66(3):424–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schmahmann JD. MRI atlas of the human cerebellum. San Diego: Academic Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buttner N, Geschwind D, Jen JC, Perlman S, Pulst SM, Baloh RW. Oculomotor phenotypes in autosomal dominant ataxias. Arch Neurol. 1998;55(10):1353–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schulz JB, Borkert J, Wolf S, Schmitz-Hübsch T, Rakowicz M, Mariotti C, et al. Visualization, quantification and correlation of brain atrophy with clinical symptoms in spinocerebellar ataxia types 1, 3 and 6. Neuroimage. 2010;49(1):158–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marzban H, Chung S-H, Pezhouh MK, Feirabend H, Watanabe M, Voogd J, et al. Antigenic compartmentation of the cerebellar cortex in the chicken (Gallus domesticus). J Comp Neurol. 2010;518(12):2221–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kawamura K, Hashikawa T. Projections from the pontine nuclei proper and reticular tegmental nucleus onto the cerebellar cortex in the cat. An autoradiographic study. J Comp Neurol. 1981;201(3):395–413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Voogd J, Barmack NH. Oculomotor cerebellum. Prog Brain Res. 2006;151:231–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Glickstein M, Gerrits N, Kralj-Hans I, Mercier B, Stein J, Voogd J. Visual pontocerebellar projections in the macaque. J Comp Neurol. 1994;349(1):51–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eisenman LM, Noback CR. The ponto-cerebellar projection in the rat: differential projections to sublobules of the uvula. Exp Brain Res. 1980;38(1):11–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brodal A, Hoddevik GH. The pontocerebellar projection of the uvula in the cat. Exp Brain Res. 1978;32(1):105–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mower G, Gibson A, Robinson F, Stein J, Glickstein M. Visual pontocerebellar projections in the cat. J Neurophysiol. 1980;43(2):355–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gerrits NM, Epema AH, Voogd J. The mossy fiber projection of the nucleus reticularis tegmenti pontis to the flocculus and adjacent ventral paraflocculus in the cat. Neuroscience. 1984;11(3):627–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robinson FR, Cohen JL, May J, Sestokas AK, Glickstein M. Cerebellar targets of visual pontine cells in the cat. J Comp Neurol. 1984;223(4):471–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Akaogi K. Afferent projections to the nodulus in the cat. II. Mossy fiber projections. Nippon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho. 1994;97(1):12–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brodal P. Further observations on the cerebellar projections from the pontine nuclei and the nucleus reticularis tegmenti pontis in the rhesus monkey. J Comp Neurol. 1982;204(1):44–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu J, Tang T-S, Tu H, Nelson O, Herndon E, Huynh DP, et al. Deranged calcium signaling and neurodegeneration in spinocerebellar ataxia type 2. J Neurosci. 2009;29(29):9148–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen X, Tang T-S, Tu H, Nelson O, Pook M, Hammer R, et al. Deranged calcium signaling and neurodegeneration in spinocerebellar ataxia type 3. J Neurosci. 2008;28(48):12713–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rajakulendran S, Schorge S, Kullmann DM, Hanna MG. Dysfunction of the Ca(V)2.1 calcium channel in cerebellar ataxias. F1000 Biol Rep [Internet]. 2010 [cited 1 Jun 2011]; 2. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20948794.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian C. Jung
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Soo I. Choi
    • 1
    • 4
  • Annie X. Du
    • 1
  • Jennifer L. Cuzzocreo
    • 1
  • Zhuo Z. Geng
    • 1
  • Howard S. Ying
    • 5
  • Susan L. Perlman
    • 6
  • Arthur W. Toga
    • 6
  • Jerry L. Prince
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  • Sarah H. Ying
    • 1
    • 5
    • 9
    • 10
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyThe Johns Hopkins University, School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation ScienceThe University of Maryland, School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Baltimore Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC)BaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Department of RheumatologyUniversity of California, Los Angeles, School of MedicineLos AngelesUSA
  5. 5.Department of OphthalmologyThe Johns Hopkins University, School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  6. 6.Department of NeurologyUniversity of California, Los Angeles, School of MedicineLos AngelesUSA
  7. 7.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringThe Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  8. 8.Department of Biomedical EngineeringThe Johns Hopkins University, School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  9. 9.Department of RadiologyThe Johns Hopkins University, School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  10. 10.BaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations