AUTHOR=Tozlu Ceren , Jamison Keith , Gauthier Susan A. , Kuceyeski Amy
TITLE=Dynamic Functional Connectivity Better Predicts Disability Than Structural and Static Functional Connectivity in People With Multiple Sclerosis
JOURNAL=Frontiers in Neuroscience
VOLUME=15
YEAR=2021
URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.763966
DOI=10.3389/fnins.2021.763966
ISSN=1662-453X
ABSTRACT=Background: Advanced imaging techniques such as diffusion and functional MRI can be used to identify pathology-related changes to the brain's structural and functional connectivity (SC and FC) networks and mapping of these changes to disability and compensatory mechanisms in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). No study to date performed a comparison study to investigate which connectivity type (SC, static or dynamic FC) better distinguishes healthy controls (HC) from pwMS and/or classifies pwMS by disability status.
Aims: We aim to compare the performance of SC, static FC, and dynamic FC (dFC) in classifying (a) HC vs. pwMS and (b) pwMS who have no disability vs. with disability. The secondary objective of the study is to identify which brain regions' connectome measures contribute most to the classification tasks.
Materials and Methods: One hundred pwMS and 19 HC were included. Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) was used to assess disability, where 67 pwMS who had EDSS<2 were considered as not having disability. Diffusion and resting-state functional MRI were used to compute the SC and FC matrices, respectively. Logistic regression with ridge regularization was performed, where the models included demographics/clinical information and either pairwise entries or regional summaries from one of the following matrices: SC, FC, and dFC. The performance of the models was assessed using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC).
Results: In classifying HC vs. pwMS, the regional SC model significantly outperformed others with a median AUC of 0.89 (p <0.05). In classifying pwMS by disability status, the regional dFC and dFC metrics models significantly outperformed others with a median AUC of 0.65 and 0.61 (p < 0.05). Regional SC in the dorsal attention, subcortical and cerebellar networks were the most important variables in the HC vs. pwMS classification task. Increased regional dFC in dorsal attention and visual networks and decreased regional dFC in frontoparietal and cerebellar networks in certain dFC states was associated with being in the group of pwMS with evidence of disability.
Discussion: Damage to SCs is a hallmark of MS and, unsurprisingly, the most accurate connectomic measure in classifying patients and controls. On the other hand, dynamic FC metrics were most important for determining disability level in pwMS, and could represent functional compensation in response to white matter pathology in pwMS.