Identifying disease-related subnetwork connectome biomarkers by sparse hypergraph learning
The functional brain network has gained increased attention in the neuroscience community because of its ability to reveal the underlying architecture of human brain. In general, majority work of functional network connectivity is built based on the correlations between discrete-time-series signals that link only two different brain regions. However, these simple region-to-region connectivity models do not capture complex connectivity patterns between three or more brain regions that form a connectivity subnetwork, or subnetwork for short. To overcome this current limitation, a hypergraph learning-based method is proposed to identify subnetwork differences between two different cohorts. To achieve our goal, a hypergraph is constructed, where each vertex represents a subject and also a hyperedge encodes a subnetwork with similar functional connectivity patterns between different subjects. Unlike previous learning-based methods, our approach is designed to jointly optimize the weights for all hyperedges such that the learned representation is in consensus with the distribution of phenotype data, i.e. clinical labels. In order to suppress the spurious subnetwork biomarkers, we further enforce a sparsity constraint on the hyperedge weights, where a larger hyperedge weight indicates the subnetwork with the capability of identifying the disorder condition. We apply our hypergraph learning-based method to identify subnetwork biomarkers in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). A comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis is performed, and the results show that our approach can correctly classify ASD and ADHD subjects from normal controls with 87.65 and 65.08% accuracies, respectively.
KeywordsHypergraph learning Brain network Biomarker Autism spectrum disorder Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants 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.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Agarwal, S., Lim, J., Zelnik-Manor, L., Perona, P., Kriegman, D., & Belongie, S. (2005). Beyond pairwise clustering. In 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05) (vol. 2, pp. 838–845). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Bu, J. et al. (2010) Music recommendation by unified hypergraph: combining social media information and music content. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM international conference on Multimedia (pp. 391–400). ACM.Google Scholar
- Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995). Support-vector networks. Machine Learning, 20(3), 273–297.Google Scholar
- Gao, Y., Adeli-M, E., Kim, M., Giannakopoulos, P., Haller, S., and Shen, D. (2015a) Medical image retrieval using multi-graph learning for MCI diagnostic assistance. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (pp. 86–93). Springer.Google Scholar
- Gao, Y. et al. (2015b) MCI identification by joint learning on multiple MRI data. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (pp. 78–85) Springer.Google Scholar
- Huang, Y., Liu, Q., Zhang, S., and Metaxas, D. N. (2010) Image retrieval via probabilistic hypergraph ranking. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2010 IEEE Conference on, pp. 3376–3383: IEEE.Google Scholar
- Matthews, P., & Jezzard, P. (2004). Functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 75(1), 6–12.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, J. A. et al. (2013) Multisite functional connectivity MRI classification of autism: ABIDE results.Google Scholar
- Sun, L., Ji, S., & Ye, J. (2008). Hypergraph spectral learning for multi-label classification. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 668–676). ACM.Google Scholar
- Tao, D., Li, X., Hu, W., Maybank, S., and Wu, X. (2005) Supervised tensor learning. In Fifth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'05) (pp. 8). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Tzourio-Mazoyer, N., Landeau, B., Papathanassiou, D., Crivello, F., Etard, O., Delcroix, N., Mazoyer, B., & Joliot, M. (2002). Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain. Neuroimage, 15(1), 273–289.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zass, R. and Shashua, A. (2008) Probabilistic graph and hypergraph matching. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2008. CVPR 2008. IEEE Conference on (pp. 1–8) IEEE.Google Scholar
- Zhou, D., Huang, J., and Schölkopf, B. (2006). Learning with hypergraphs: Clustering, classification, and embedding. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1601–1608).Google Scholar