MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405035644 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.01865

Enhancing Brain Age Estimation with a Multimodal 3D CNN Approach Combining Structural MRI and AI-Synthesized Cerebral Blood Volume Measures

2024· preprint· en· W4405035644 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jordan Jomsky, Zongyu Li, Yiren Zhang, Jia Guo

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbBioClinicaU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsVolume (thermodynamics)Cerebral blood volumeBrain sizeArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)EstimationNeuroimagingNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingMedicinePsychologyRadiologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Brain age gap estimation (BrainAGE) is a promising imaging-derived biomarker of neurobiological ageing and disease risk, yet current approaches rely predominantly on T1-weighted structural MRI, overlooking functional vascular changes that may precede tissue damage and cognitive decline. Deep learning-derived cerebral blood volume (DeepCBV) maps, synthesized from non-contrast MRI, offer a scalable alternative to contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging by capturing vascular information relevant to early neurodegeneration. We developed a multimodal BrainAGE framework that combines predictions from two separate three-dimensional convolutional neural networks: one trained only on structural MRI scans and another trained only on DeepCBV maps generated by a pre-trained three-dimensional patch-based deep learning model. Each model was trained and validated on 2851 scans (1507 females) from 13 open-source datasets and was evaluated for concordance with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) using 1233 subjects. The combined model achieved the most accurate brain age gap for cognitively normal (CN) controls, with a mean absolute error of 3.95 years (R2 = 0.943), outperforming models trained on MRI (mean absolute error = 4.10) or DeepCBV alone (mean absolute error = 4.49). Saliency maps revealed complementary modality contributions: MRI emphasized white matter and cortical atrophy, while DeepCBV highlighted vascular-rich and periventricular regions implicated in hypoperfusion and early cerebrovascular dysfunction, consistent with known patterns of normal ageing. Next, we observed that BrainAGE increased stepwise across diagnostic strata (CN < MCI < AD) and correlated with cognitive impairment (Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes ⍴ = 0.403; Mini-Mental State Examination ⍴ = −0.310). DeepCBV-based BrainAGE showed a particularly strong separation between stable versus progressive MCI (Mann–Whitney U = 2.177 × 104, P = 4.43 × 10−8), suggesting sensitivity to prodromal vascular changes that precede overt atrophy. Integrating structural MRI with deep learning-derived vascular measures substantially enhances BrainAGE estimation and improves sensitivity to MCI and Alzheimer’s disease progression, supporting its potential role in risk stratification, early detection and monitoring of therapeutic response. By enabling a functional-like assessment from routine MRI, this approach lowers barriers to multimodal evaluation and provides a clinically actionable biomarker for large-scale ageing and dementia studies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.149 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207