Advertisement

Combining Multiple Connectomes via Canonical Correlation Analysis Improves Predictive Models

  • Siyuan GaoEmail author
  • Abigail S. Greene
  • R. Todd Constable
  • Dustin Scheinost
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11072)

Abstract

Generating models from functional connectivity data that predict behavioral measures holds great clinical potential. While the majority of the literature has focused on using only connectivity data from a single source, there is ample evidence that different cognitive conditions amplify individual differences in functional connectivity in a distinct, complementary manner. In this work, we introduce a computational model, labeled multidimensional Connectome-based Predictive Modeling (mCPM), that combines connectivity matrices collected from different task conditions in order to improve behavioral prediction by using complementary information found in different cognitive tasks. We apply our algorithm to data from the Human Connectome Project and UCLA Consortium for Neuropsychiatric Phenomics (CNP) LA5c Study. Using data from multiple tasks, mCPM generated models that better predicted IQ than models generated from any single task. Our results suggest that prediction of behavior can be improved by including multiple task conditions in computational models, that different tasks provide complementary information for prediction, and that mCPM provides a principled method for modeling such data.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Data were provided in part by the Human Connectome Project, WU-Minn Consortium (Principal Investigators: David Van Essen and Kamil Ugurbil; 1U54 MH091657) funded by the 16 NIH Institutes and Centers that support the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research; and by the McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience at Washington University and the Consortium for Neuropsychiatric Phenomics (UL1 DE019580, RL1 MH083268, RL1 MH083269, RL1 DA024853, RL1 MH083270, RL1L M009833, PL1 MH083271, and PL1 NS062410).

References

  1. 1.
    Dosenbach, N.U.F., et al.: Prediction of individual brain maturity using fMRI. Science 329(5997), 1358–1361 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smith, S.M., et al.: A positive-negative mode of population covariation links brain connectivity, demographics and behavior. Nat. Neurosci. 18(11), 1565–1567 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Finn, E.S., Scheinost, D., Finn, D.M., Shen, X., Papademetris, X., Constable, R.T.: Can brain state be manipulated to emphasize individual differences in functional connectivity? NeuroImage 160, 140–151 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vanderwal, T., Eilbott, J., Finn, E.S., Craddock, R.C., Turnbull, A., Castellanos, F.X.: Individual differences in functional connectivity during naturalistic viewing conditions. NeuroImage 157, 521–530 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shen, X., et al.: Using connectome-based predictive modeling to predict individual behavior from brain connectivity. Nat. Protoc. 12(3), 506–518 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van Essen, D.C., et al.: The WU-Minn human connectome project: an overview. Neuroimage 80, 62–79 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Poldrack, R.A., et al.: A phenome-wide examination of neural and cognitive function. Sci. Data 3, 160110 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, G., et al.: Classification of alzheimer disease, mild cognitive impairment, and normal cognitive status with large-scale network analysis based on resting-state functional MR imaging. Radiology 259(1), 213–221 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown, M., et al.: ADHD-200 global competition: diagnosing ADHD using personal characteristic data can outperform resting state fMRI measurements. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 6, 69 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arbabshirani, M., Kiehl, K., Pearlson, G., Calhoun, V.: Classification of schizophrenia patients based on resting-state functional network connectivity. Front. Neurosci. 7, 133 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zeng, L.-L., et al.: Identifying major depression using whole-brain functional connectivity: a multivariate pattern analysis. Brain 135(5), 1498–1507 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Plitt, M., Barnes, K.A., Martin, A.: Functional connectivity classification of autism identifies highly predictive brain features but falls short of biomarker standards. NeuroImage: Clin. 7, 359–366 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Finn, E.S., et al.: Functional connectome fingerprinting: identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity. Nat. Neurosci. 18(11), 1664–1671 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kosuke Yoshida, Y., et al.: Prediction of clinical depression scores and detection of changes in whole-brain using resting-state functional MRI data with partial least squares regression. PLoS ONE 12(7), e0179638 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siyuan Gao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Abigail S. Greene
    • 2
  • R. Todd Constable
    • 3
  • Dustin Scheinost
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Interdepartmental Neuroscience ProgramYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  3. 3.Department of Radiology and Biomedical ImagingYale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations