Longitudinal clustering analysis and prediction of Parkinson’s disease progression using radiomics and hybrid machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We employed machine learning approaches to (I) determine distinct progression trajectories in Parkinson's disease (PD) (unsupervised clustering task), and (II) predict progression trajectories (supervised prediction task), from early (years 0 and 1) data, making use of clinical and imaging features. METHODS: We studied PD-subjects derived from longitudinal datasets (years 0, 1, 2 & 4; Parkinson's Progressive Marker Initiative). We extracted and analyzed 981 features, including motor, non-motor, and radiomics features extracted for each region-of-interest (ROIs: left/right caudate and putamen) using our standardized standardized environment for radiomics analysis (SERA) radiomics software. Segmentation of ROIs on dopamine transposer - single photon emission computed tomography (DAT SPECT) images were performed via magnetic resonance images (MRI). After performing cross-sectional clustering on 885 subjects (original dataset) to identify disease subtypes, we identified optimal longitudinal trajectories using hybrid machine learning systems (HMLS), including principal component analysis (PCA) + K-Means algorithms (KMA) followed by Bayesian information criterion (BIC), Calinski-Harabatz criterion (CHC), and elbow criterion (EC). Subsequently, prediction of the identified trajectories from early year data was performed using multiple HMLSs including 16 Dimension Reduction Algorithms (DRA) and 10 classification algorithms. RESULTS: We identified 3 distinct progression trajectories. Hotelling's t squared test (HTST) showed that the identified trajectories were distinct. The trajectories included those with (I, II) disease escalation (2 trajectories, 27% and 38% of patients) and (III) stable disease (1 trajectory, 35% of patients). For trajectory prediction from early year data, HMLSs including the stochastic neighbor embedding algorithm (SNEA, as a DRA) as well as locally linear embedding algorithm (LLEA, as a DRA), linked with the new probabilistic neural network classifier (NPNNC, as a classifier), resulted in accuracies of 78.4% and 79.2% respectively, while other HMLSs such as SNEA + Lib_SVM (library for support vector machines) and t_SNE (t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding) + NPNNC resulted in 76.5% and 76.1% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study moves beyond cross-sectional PD subtyping to clustering of longitudinal disease trajectories. We conclude that combining medical information with SPECT-based radiomics features, and optimal utilization of HMLSs, can identify distinct disease trajectories in PD patients, and enable effective prediction of disease trajectories from early year data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".