Abstract
Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is considered the early stage of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The purpose of our study was to analyze the basic characteristics and serum and imaging biomarkers for the diagnosis of MCI patients as a more objective and accurate approach.
Methods: The Montreal Cognitive Test was used to test 119 patients aged ≥65. Such serum biomarkers were detected as preprandial blood glucose, triglyceride, total cholesterol, Aβ1-40, Aβ1-42, and P-tau. All the subjects were scanned with 1.5T MRI (GE Healthcare, WI, USA) to obtain DWI, DTI, and ASL images. DTI was used to calculate the anisotropy fraction (FA), DWI was used to calculate the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and ASL was used to calculate the cerebral blood flow (CBF). All the images were then registered to the SPACE of the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI). In 116 brain regions, the medians of FA, ADC, and CBF were extracted by automatic anatomical labeling. The basic characteristics included gender, education level, and previous disease history of hypertension, diabetes, and coronary heart disease. The data were randomly divided into training sets and test ones. The recursive random forest algorithm was applied to the diagnosis of MCI patients, and the recursive feature elimination (RFE) method was used to screen the significant basic features and serum and imaging biomarkers. The overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated, respectively, and so were the ROC curve and the area under the curve (AUC) of the test set.
Results: When the variable of the MCI diagnostic model was an imaging biomarker, the training accuracy of the random forest was 100%, the correct rate of the test was 86.23%, the sensitivity was 78.26%, and the specificity was 100%. When combining the basic characteristics, the serum and imaging biomarkers as variables of the MCI diagnostic model, the training accuracy of the random forest was found to be 100%; the test accuracy was 97.23%, the sensitivity was 94.44%, and the specificity was 100%. RFE analysis showed that age, Aβ1-40, and cerebellum_4_6 were the most important basic feature, serum biomarker, imaging biomarker, respectively.
Conclusion: Imaging biomarkers can effectively diagnose MCI. The diagnostic capacity of the basic trait biomarkers or serum biomarkers for MCI is limited, but their combination with imaging biomarkers can improve the diagnostic capacity, as indicated by the sensitivity of 94.44% and the specificity of 100% in our model. As a machine learning method, a random forest can help diagnose MCI effectively while screening important influencing factors.
Keywords: Machine learning, algorithms, cognitive dysfunction, diagnostic tool, mild cognitive impairment, screening.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejn.14652] [PMID: 31856354]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trci.2019.11.002] [PMID: 31853477]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2019.101625] [PMID: 31841947]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2017.05.007] [PMID: 28533150]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2018.8512398] [PMID: 30440502]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1567205013666161122094208] [PMID: 27875948]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.1183]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-190610] [PMID: 31381520]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000773] [PMID: 31356389]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cger.2017.02.005] [PMID: 28689566]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autneu.2018.03.004] [PMID: 29628432]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56625-2] [PMID: 31882919]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2019.10.010] [PMID: 31883770]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000008864] [PMID: 31888969]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2018.06.012] [PMID: 30539733]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1356] [PMID: 31286695]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2017.10.007] [PMID: 29126669]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2019.1667798] [PMID: 31549530]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2018.00268] [PMID: 30245626]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2411051051] [PMID: 16990677]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2014.04.038] [PMID: 25444606]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2019.10.023] [PMID: 31813626]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22830] [PMID: 26037224]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2019.146554] [PMID: 31765631]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/biof.1541] [PMID: 31301192]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00343] [PMID: 31031585]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1194/jlr.P119000473] [PMID: 31892526]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2019.12.028] [PMID: 32210695]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-190560] [PMID: 31796668]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2018.04.008] [PMID: 29907423]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185641] [PMID: 28972994]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13909] [PMID: 31642932]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WAD.0000000000000346] [PMID: 31567145]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.4756] [PMID: 28731508]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2007.06.004] [PMID: 17659998]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.075] [PMID: 26241684]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171532] [PMID: 28158291]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12935-020-01274-z] [PMID: 32565735]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2020.578742] [PMID: 33192471]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.557977] [PMID: 33324316]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100654] [PMID: 33313373]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5551/jat.52928] [PMID: 32062643]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms21145007] [PMID: 32679907]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-191016] [PMID: 31771070]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2020.590546] [PMID: 33328967]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.01016] [PMID: 33071928]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04752-8] [PMID: 32157432]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-201162] [PMID: 33682707]