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

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).

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

  • 5,363
    views
  • 612
    downloads
  • 92
    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. Denis Alexander Engemann
  2. Oleh Kozynets
  3. David Sabbagh
  4. Guillaume Lemaître
  5. Gaël Varoquaux
  6. Franziskus Liem
  7. Alexandre Gramfort
(2020)
Combining magnetoencephalography with magnetic resonance imaging enhances learning of surrogate-biomarkers
eLife 9:e54055.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54055

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54055

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sisi Wang, Freek van Ede
    Research Article

    A classic distinction from the domain of external attention is that between anticipatory orienting and subsequent re-orienting of attention to unexpected events. Whether and how humans also re-orient attention ‘in mind’ following expected and unexpected working-memory tests remains elusive. We leveraged spatial modulations in neural activity and gaze to isolate re-orienting within the spatial layout of visual working memory following central memory tests of certain, expected, or unexpected mnemonic content. Besides internal orienting after predictive cues, we unveil a second stage of internal attentional deployment following both expected and unexpected memory tests. Following expected tests, internal attentional deployment was not contingent on prior orienting, suggesting an additional verification – ‘double checking’ – in memory. Following unexpected tests, re-focusing of alternative memory content was prolonged. This brings attentional re-orienting to the domain of working memory and underscores how memory tests can invoke either a verification or a revision of our internal focus.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Brian DePasquale, Carlos D Brody, Jonathan W Pillow
    Research Article Updated

    Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.