1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Combining magnetoencephalography with magnetic resonance imaging enhances learning of surrogate-biomarkers

Tools and Resources
  • Cited 15
  • Views 3,549
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2020;9:e54055 doi: 10.7554/eLife.54055

Abstract

Electrophysiological methods, i.e., M/EEG provide unique views into brain health. Yet, when building predictive models from brain data, it is often unclear how electrophysiology should be combined with other neuroimaging methods. Information can be redundant, useful common representations of multimodal data may not be obvious and multimodal data collection can be medically contraindicated, which reduces applicability. Here, we propose a multimodal model to robustly combine MEG, MRI and fMRI for prediction. We focus on age prediction as a surrogate biomarker in 674 subjects from the Cam-CAN dataset. Strikingly, MEG, fMRI and MRI showed additive effects supporting distinct brain-behavior associations. Moreover, the contribution of MEG was best explained by cortical power spectra between 8 and 30 Hz. Finally, we demonstrate that the model preserves benefits of stacking when some data is missing. The proposed framework, hence, enables multimodal learning for a wide range of biomarkers from diverse types of brain signals.

Data availability

We used the publicly available Cam-CAN dataset. All software and code necessary to obtain the derivative data is shared on github: https://github.com/dengemann/meg-mri-surrogate-biomarkers-aging-2020

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Denis Alexander Engemann

    Parietal, Inria Saclay, Palaiseau, France
    For correspondence
    denis-alexander.engemann@inria.fr
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7223-1014
  2. Oleh Kozynets

    Parietal, Inria Saclay, Palaiseau, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. David Sabbagh

    Parietal, Inria Saclay, Palaiseau, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Guillaume Lemaître

    Parietal, Inria Saclay, Palaiseau, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Gaël Varoquaux

    Parietal, Inria Saclay, Palaiseau, France
    Competing interests
    Gaël Varoquaux, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1076-5122
  6. Franziskus Liem

    Dynamics of Healthy Aging, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Alexandre Gramfort

    Parietal, Inria Saclay, Palaiseau, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

Funding

H2020 European Research Council (SLAB ERC-YStG-676943)

  • Alexandre Gramfort

French National Institute of Computer Science (Medecine Numerique)

  • Denis Alexander Engemann

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

Ethics

Human subjects: This study is conducted in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration. No experiments on living beings were performed for this study. The data that we used was acquired by the Cam-CAN consortium and has been approved by the local ethics committee, Cambridgeshire 2 Research Ethics Committee (reference: 10/H0308/50).

Reviewing Editor

  1. Alexander Shackman, University of Maryland, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: November 29, 2019
  2. Accepted: May 9, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 19, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 22, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2020, Engemann 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

  • 3,549
    Page views
  • 388
    Downloads
  • 15
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

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

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

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Hemin Feng et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Although fear memory formation is essential for survival and fear-related mental disorders, the neural circuitry and mechanism are incompletely understood. Here, we utilized trace fear conditioning to study the formation of trace fear memory in mice. We identified the entorhinal cortex (EC) as a critical component of sensory signaling to the amygdala. We adopted both loss-of-function and gain-of-function experiments to demonstrate that release of the cholecystokinin (CCK) from the EC is required for trace fear memory formation. We discovered that CCK-positive neurons project from the EC to the lateral nuclei of the amygdala (LA), and inhibition of CCK-dependent signaling in the EC prevented long-term potentiation of the auditory response in the LA and formation of trace fear memory. In summary, high-frequency activation of EC neurons triggers the release of CCK in their projection terminals in the LA, potentiating auditory response in LA neurons. The neural plasticity in the LA leads to trace fear memory formation.

    1. Neuroscience
    Gordon H Petty et al.
    Research Article

    Neocortical sensory areas have associated primary and secondary thalamic nuclei. While primary nuclei transmit sensory information to cortex, secondary nuclei remain poorly understood. We recorded juxtasomally from secondary somatosensory (POm) and visual (LP) nuclei of awake mice while tracking whisking and pupil size. POm activity correlated with whisking, but not precise whisker kinematics. This coarse movement modulation persisted after facial paralysis and thus was not due to sensory reafference. This phenomenon also continued during optogenetic silencing of somatosensory and motor cortex and after lesion of superior colliculus, ruling out a motor efference copy mechanism. Whisking and pupil dilation were strongly correlated, possibly reflecting arousal. Indeed LP, which is not part of the whisker system, tracked whisking equally well, further indicating that POm activity does not encode whisker movement per se. The semblance of movement-related activity is likely instead a global effect of arousal on both nuclei. We conclude that secondary thalamus monitors behavioral state, rather than movement, and may exist to alter cortical activity accordingly.