Development and Validation of a Brain Aging Biomarker in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: Deep Learning Approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Precise assessment of brain aging is crucial for early detection of neurodegenerative disorders and aiding clinical practice. Existing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based methods excel in this task, but they still have room for improvement in capturing local morphological variations across brain regions and preserving the inherent neurobiological topological structures. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a deep learning framework incorporating both connectivity and complexity for accurate brain aging estimation, facilitating early identification of neurodegenerative diseases. METHODS: We used 5889 T1-weighted MRI scans from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative dataset. We proposed a novel brain vision graph neural network (BVGN), incorporating neurobiologically informed feature extraction modules and global association mechanisms to provide a sensitive deep learning-based imaging biomarker. Model performance was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE) against benchmark models, while generalization capability was further validated on an external UK Biobank dataset. We calculated the brain age gap across distinct cognitive states and conducted multiple logistic regressions to compare its discriminative capacity against conventional cognitive-related variables in distinguishing cognitively normal (CN) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) states. Longitudinal track, Cox regression, and Kaplan-Meier plots were used to investigate the longitudinal performance of the brain age gap. RESULTS: The BVGN model achieved an MAE of 2.39 years, surpassing current state-of-the-art approaches while obtaining an interpretable saliency map and graph theory supported by medical evidence. Furthermore, its performance was validated on the UK Biobank cohort (N=34,352) with an MAE of 2.49 years. The brain age gap derived from BVGN exhibited significant difference across cognitive states (CN vs MCI vs Alzheimer disease; P<.001), and demonstrated the highest discriminative capacity between CN and MCI than general cognitive assessments, brain volume features, and apolipoprotein E4 carriage (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] of 0.885 vs AUC ranging from 0.646 to 0.815). Brain age gap exhibited clinical feasibility combined with Functional Activities Questionnaire, with improved discriminative capacity in models achieving lower MAEs (AUC of 0.945 vs 0.923 and 0.911; AUC of 0.935 vs 0.900 and 0.881). An increasing brain age gap identified by BVGN may indicate underlying pathological changes in the CN to MCI progression, with each unit increase linked to a 55% (hazard ratio=1.55, 95% CI 1.13-2.13; P=.006) higher risk of cognitive decline in individuals who are CN and a 29% (hazard ratio=1.29, 95% CI 1.09-1.51; P=.002) increase in individuals with MCI. CONCLUSIONS: BVGN offers a precise framework for brain aging assessment, demonstrates strong generalization on an external large-scale dataset, and proposes novel interpretability strategies to elucidate multiregional cooperative aging patterns. The brain age gap derived from BVGN is validated as a sensitive biomarker for early identification of MCI and predicting cognitive decline, offering substantial potential for clinical applications.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».