Differences in topological progression profile among neurodegenerative diseases from imaging data

  1. Sara Garbarino  Is a corresponding author
  2. Marco Lorenzi
  3. Neil P Oxtoby
  4. Elisabeth J Vinke
  5. Razvan V Marinescu
  6. Arman Eshaghi
  7. M Arfan Ikram
  8. Wiro J Niessen
  9. Olga Ciccarelli
  10. Frederik Barkhof
  11. Jonathan M Schott
  12. Meike W Vernooij
  13. Daniel C Alexander
  1. Inria Centre de Recherche Sophia Antipolis Méditerranée, France
  2. University College London, United Kingdom
  3. Erasmus Medical Center, Netherlands

Abstract

The spatial distribution of atrophy in neurodegenerative diseases suggests that brain connectivity mediates disease propagation. Different descriptors of the connectivity graph potentially relate to different underlying mechanisms of propagation. Previous approaches for evaluating the influence of connectivity on neurodegeneration consider each descriptor in isolation and match predictions against late-stage atrophy patterns. We introduce the notion of a topological profile — a characteristic combination of topological descriptors that best describes the propagation of pathology in a particular disease. By drawing on recent advances in disease progression modeling, we estimate topological profiles from the full course of pathology accumulation, at both cohort and individual levels. Experimental results comparing topological profiles for Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis and normal ageing show that topological profiles explain the observed data better than single descriptors. Within each condition, most individual profiles cluster around the cohort-level profile, and individuals whose profiles align more closely with other cohort-level profiles show features of that cohort. The cohort-level profiles suggest new insights into the biological mechanisms underlying pathology propagation in each disease.

Data availability

AD data set from ADNI. ADNI is a public-private partnership. All ADNI data are shared without embargo through the LONI Image and Data Archive (https://ida.loni.usc.edu/login.jsp) a secure research data repository. Interested scientists may obtain access to ADNI imaging, clinical, genomic, and biomarker data for the purposes of scientific investigation, teaching, or planning clinical research studies. Access is contingent on adherence to the ADNI Data Use Agreement. For up-to-date information please see http://adni.loni.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/how_to_apply/ADNI_DSP_Policy.pdf.PPMS data set from UCLH. Data can be obtained upon request, directed the management team of the data at the Institute of Neurology, UCL: uclh.qsmsc@nhs.net.HA data set from the Rotterdam Study. Data can be obtained upon request. Requests should be directed towards the management team of the Rotterdam Study (secretariat.epi@erasmusmc.nl), which has a protocol for approving data requests. Because of restrictions based on privacy regulations and informed consent of the participants, data cannot be made freely available in a public repository. The Rotterdam Study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Erasmus MC (registration number MEC 02.1015) and by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (Population Screening Act WBO, license number 1071272-159521-PG). The Rotterdam Study has been entered into the Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR; www.trialregister.nl) and into the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; www.who.int/ictrp/network/primary/en/) under shared catalogue number NTR6831. All participants provided written informed consent to participate in the study and to have their information obtained from treating physicians.HCP data are from the Human Connectome Project. Open Access Data (all imaging data and most of the behavioral data) is available to those who register an account at ConnectomeDB and agree to the Open Access Data Use Terms. This includes agreement to comply with institutional rules and regulations. For up-to-date information please see https://www.humanconnectome.org/study/hcp-young-adult/data-use-terms.

The following previously published data sets were used
    1. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
    (2003) ADNI
    Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sara Garbarino

    Epione team-project, Inria Centre de Recherche Sophia Antipolis Méditerranée, Sophia Antipolis, France
    For correspondence
    sara.garbarino@inria.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3583-3630
  2. Marco Lorenzi

    Epione team-project, Inria Centre de Recherche Sophia Antipolis Méditerranée, Sophia Antipolis, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Neil P Oxtoby

    Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0203-3909
  4. Elisabeth J Vinke

    Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Razvan V Marinescu

    Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Arman Eshaghi

    Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. M Arfan Ikram

    Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Wiro J Niessen

    Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Olga Ciccarelli

    Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Frederik Barkhof

    Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3543-3706
  11. Jonathan M Schott

    Dementia Research Centre, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Meike W Vernooij

    Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Daniel C Alexander

    Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (666992)

  • Sara Garbarino
  • Marco Lorenzi
  • Neil P Oxtoby
  • Elisabeth J Vinke
  • Olga Ciccarelli
  • Frederik Barkhof
  • Jonathan M Schott
  • Meike W Vernooij
  • Daniel C Alexander

UCA Jedi (ANX 15 IDEX 01)

  • Sara Garbarino

Michael J Fox Foundation (BAND 15 368107 11042)

  • Neil P Oxtoby

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/M020533/1)

  • Neil P Oxtoby
  • Daniel C Alexander

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/J020990/01)

  • Neil P Oxtoby

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2019, Garbarino et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,116
    views
  • 320
    downloads
  • 13
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Sara Garbarino
  2. Marco Lorenzi
  3. Neil P Oxtoby
  4. Elisabeth J Vinke
  5. Razvan V Marinescu
  6. Arman Eshaghi
  7. M Arfan Ikram
  8. Wiro J Niessen
  9. Olga Ciccarelli
  10. Frederik Barkhof
  11. Jonathan M Schott
  12. Meike W Vernooij
  13. Daniel C Alexander
(2019)
Differences in topological progression profile among neurodegenerative diseases from imaging data
eLife 8:e49298.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49298

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49298

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Saugat Poudel, Jason Hyun ... Bernhard O Palsson
    Research Article

    The Staphylococcus aureus clonal complex 8 (CC8) is made up of several subtypes with varying levels of clinical burden; from community-associated methicillin-resistant S. aureus USA300 strains to hospital-associated (HA-MRSA) USA500 strains and ancestral methicillin-susceptible (MSSA) strains. This phenotypic distribution within a single clonal complex makes CC8 an ideal clade to study the emergence of mutations important for antibiotic resistance and community spread. Gene-level analysis comparing USA300 against MSSA and HA-MRSA strains have revealed key horizontally acquired genes important for its rapid spread in the community. However, efforts to define the contributions of point mutations and indels have been confounded by strong linkage disequilibrium resulting from clonal propagation. To break down this confounding effect, we combined genetic association testing with a model of the transcriptional regulatory network (TRN) to find candidate mutations that may have led to changes in gene regulation. First, we used a De Bruijn graph genome-wide association study to enrich mutations unique to the USA300 lineages within CC8. Next, we reconstructed the TRN by using independent component analysis on 670 RNA-sequencing samples from USA300 and non-USA300 CC8 strains which predicted several genes with strain-specific altered expression patterns. Examination of the regulatory region of one of the genes enriched by both approaches, isdH, revealed a 38-bp deletion containing a Fur-binding site and a conserved single-nucleotide polymorphism which likely led to the altered expression levels in USA300 strains. Taken together, our results demonstrate the utility of reconstructed TRNs to address the limits of genetic approaches when studying emerging pathogenic strains.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    Masaaki Uematsu, Jeremy M Baskin
    Tools and Resources

    Plasmid construction is central to life science research, and sequence verification is arguably its costliest step. Long-read sequencing has emerged as a competitor to Sanger sequencing, with the principal benefit that whole plasmids can be sequenced in a single run. Nevertheless, the current cost of nanopore sequencing is still prohibitive for routine sequencing during plasmid construction. We develop a computational approach termed Simple Algorithm for Very Efficient Multiplexing of Oxford Nanopore Experiments for You (SAVEMONEY) that guides researchers to mix multiple plasmids and subsequently computationally de-mixes the resultant sequences. SAVEMONEY defines optimal mixtures in a pre-survey step, and following sequencing, executes a post-analysis workflow involving sequence classification, alignment, and consensus determination. By using Bayesian analysis with prior probability of expected plasmid construction error rate, high-confidence sequences can be obtained for each plasmid in the mixture. Plasmids differing by as little as two bases can be mixed as a single sample for nanopore sequencing, and routine multiplexing of even six plasmids per 180 reads can still maintain high accuracy of consensus sequencing. SAVEMONEY should further democratize whole-plasmid sequencing by nanopore and related technologies, driving down the effective cost of whole-plasmid sequencing to lower than that of a single Sanger sequencing run.