Autoencoder-based Feature Extraction and Classification for fMRI-based Deep Brain Stimulation Parameter Optimization for Parkinson’s Disease Treatment: Towards a Rapid Semi-automated Stimulation Optimization
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Optimized deep brain stimulation (DBS) is fast becoming a therapy of choice for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease (PD). However, the post-operative optimization (patient clinical benefits are maximized and adverse effects are minimized) of the large number of possible DBS parameter settings (signal frequency, voltage, pulse width and contact locations) using the current empirical protocol requires numerous clinical visits, which substantially increases the time to reach optimal DBS stimulation, patient cost burden and ultimately limits the number of patients who can undergo DBS treatment. These issues became even more problematic with the recent introduction of electrode models with stimulation directionality thereby enabling more complex stimulation paradigms. These difficulties have necessitated the search for a biomarker-based optimization method that will streamline the DBS optimization process. Our recently published functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and machine learning-assisted DBS parameter optimization for PD treatment has provided a way to rapidly classify DBS parameters using parcel-based features that were extracted from DBS-fMRI response maps. However, the parcel-based method had limited accuracy as the parcels are based on subjective literature review. Here, we propose an unsupervised autoencoder (AE) based extraction of features from the DBS-fMRI responses to improve this accuracy. We demonstrate the usage of the extracted features in classification methods such as multilayer perceptron (MLP), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), k-nearest neighbors (KNN) and LDA. We trained and tested these five classification algorithms using 122 fMRI response maps of 39 PD patients with a priori clinically optimized DBS parameters. Further, we investigated the robustness of the AE-based feature extraction method to changes in the activation patterns of the DBS-fMRI responses, which may be caused by difference in stimulation side and disease condition. Changes in the locations of activated and deactivated brain regions was simulated using a left-right horizontal flipping of the original left-sided (or nominal) DBS-fMRI response maps. The visualization of AE-based features extracted from the nominal and flipped DBS-fMRI response maps formed optimal and non-optimal clusters in a neuro-functionally meaningful manner, which indicate robustness of the AE-based feature extraction to subtle differences in the activated regions of DBS-fMRI response maps. The MLP, RF, SVM and LDA methods gave an overall DBS parameter classification accuracy of 96%, 94%, 92% and 93% respectively when trained using the AE-extracted features from the nominal DBS-fMRI maps. The AE-based MLP, RF, SVM and LDA accuracies were higher than the overall accuracy (81%) of our initial parcel-based LDA method. The performance of an AE-MLP model trained using the nominal DBS-fMRI maps did not change significantly when the model was tested on the flipped DBS-fMRI responses. We showed that the MLP method combined with AE-based feature extraction is best suited for fMRI-based DBS parameter optimization and represents another step towards a proposed digital tool for rapid semi-automated biomarker-based DBS optimization.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».