Predicting Age From Brain EEG Signals-A Machine Learning Approach.
ABSTRACT: Objective: The brain age gap estimate (BrainAGE) is the difference between the estimated age and the individual chronological age. BrainAGE was studied primarily using MRI techniques. EEG signals in combination with machine learning (ML) approaches were not commonly used for the human age prediction, and BrainAGE. We investigated whether age-related changes are affecting brain EEG signals, and whether we can predict the chronological age and obtain BrainAGE estimates using a rigorous ML framework with a novel and extensive EEG features extraction. Methods: EEG data were obtained from 468 healthy, mood/anxiety, eating and substance use disorder participants (297 females) from the Tulsa-1000, a naturalistic longitudinal study based on Research Domain Criteria framework. Five sets of preprocessed EEG features across channels and frequency bands were used with different ML methods to predict age. Using a nested-cross-validation (NCV) approach and stack-ensemble learning from EEG features, the predicted age was estimated. The important features and their spatial distributions were deduced. Results: The stack-ensemble age prediction model achieved R2 = 0.37 (0.06), Mean Absolute Error (MAE) = 6.87(0.69) and RMSE = 8.46(0.59) in years. The age and predicted age correlation was r = 0.6. The feature importance revealed that age predictors are spread out across different feature types. The NCV approach produced a reliable age estimation, with features consistent behavior across different folds. Conclusion: Our rigorous ML framework and extensive EEG signal features allow a reliable estimation of chronological age, and BrainAGE. This general framework can be extended to test EEG association with and to predict/study other physiological relevant responses.
Project description:Several imaging modalities, including T1-weighted structural imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, and functional MRI can show chronological age related changes. Employing machine learning algorithms, an individual's imaging data can predict their age with reasonable accuracy. While details vary according to modality, the general strategy is to: (1) extract image-related features, (2) build a model on a training set that uses those features to predict an individual's age, (3) validate the model on a test dataset, producing a predicted age for each individual, (4) define the "Brain Age Gap Estimate" (BrainAGE) as the difference between an individual's predicted age and his/her chronological age, (5) estimate the relationship between BrainAGE and other variables of interest, and (6) make inferences about those variables and accelerated or delayed brain aging. For example, a group of individuals with overall positive BrainAGE may show signs of accelerated aging in other variables as well. There is inevitably an overestimation of the age of younger individuals and an underestimation of the age of older individuals due to "regression to the mean." The correlation between chronological age and BrainAGE may significantly impact the relationship between BrainAGE and other variables of interest when they are also related to age. In this study, we examine the detectability of variable effects under different assumptions. We use empirical results from two separate datasets [training = 475 healthy volunteers, aged 18-60 years (259 female); testing = 489 participants including people with mood/anxiety, substance use, eating disorders and healthy controls, aged 18-56 years (312 female)] to inform simulation parameter selection. Outcomes in simulated and empirical data strongly support the proposal that models incorporating BrainAGE should include chronological age as a covariate. We propose either including age as a covariate in step 5 of the above framework, or employing a multistep procedure where age is regressed on BrainAGE prior to step 5, producing BrainAGE Residualized (BrainAGER) scores.
Project description:Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common form of dementia, shares many aspects of abnormal brain aging. We present a novel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based biomarker that predicts the individual progression of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to AD on the basis of pathological brain aging patterns. By employing kernel regression methods, the expression of normal brain-aging patterns forms the basis to estimate the brain age of a given new subject. If the estimated age is higher than the chronological age, a positive brain age gap estimation (BrainAGE) score indicates accelerated atrophy and is considered a risk factor for conversion to AD. Here, the BrainAGE framework was applied to predict the individual brain ages of 195 subjects with MCI at baseline, of which a total of 133 developed AD during 36 months of follow-up (corresponding to a pre-test probability of 68%). The ability of the BrainAGE framework to correctly identify MCI-converters was compared with the performance of commonly used cognitive scales, hippocampus volume, and state-of-the-art biomarkers derived from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). With accuracy rates of up to 81%, BrainAGE outperformed all cognitive scales and CSF biomarkers in predicting conversion of MCI to AD within 3 years of follow-up. Each additional year in the BrainAGE score was associated with a 10% greater risk of developing AD (hazard rate: 1.10 [CI: 1.07-1.13]). Furthermore, the post-test probability was increased to 90% when using baseline BrainAGE scores to predict conversion to AD. The presented framework allows an accurate prediction even with multicenter data. Its fast and fully automated nature facilitates the integration into the clinical workflow. It can be exploited as a tool for screening as well as for monitoring treatment options.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The age of a person's brain can be estimated from structural brain images using an aggregate measure of variation in morphology across the whole brain. The brain age gap estimation (BrainAGE) score is computed as the difference between kernel-estimated brain age and chronological age. In this exploratory study, we investigated the application of the BrainAGE measure to identify potential novel effects of pharmacological agents on brain morphology. METHODS:Twenty healthy participants (23-47 years of age) completed three structural magnetic resonance imaging scans 45 minutes after administration of placebo or 200 or 600 mg of ibuprofen in a double-blind, crossover study. An externally derived BrainAGE model from a sample of 480 healthy participants was used to examine the acute effect of ibuprofen on temporary neuroanatomical changes in healthy individuals. RESULTS:The BrainAGE model produced age prediction for each participant with a mean absolute error of 6.7 years between the estimated and chronological age. The intraclass correlation coefficient for BrainAGE was 0.96. Relative to placebo, 200 and 600 mg of ibuprofen significantly decreased BrainAGE by 1.18 and 1.15 years, respectively (p < .05). The trained BrainAGE model identified the medial prefrontal cortex to be the strongest age predictor. CONCLUSIONS:BrainAGE is a potentially useful construct to examine neurological effects of therapeutic drugs. Ibuprofen temporarily reduces BrainAGE by approximately 1 year, which is likely due to its acute anti-inflammatory effects.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>The greater presence of neurodevelopmental antecedants may differentiate schizophrenia from bipolar disorders (BD). Machine learning/pattern recognition allows us to estimate the biological age of the brain from structural magnetic resonance imaging scans (MRI). The discrepancy between brain and chronological age could contribute to early detection and differentiation of BD and schizophrenia.<h4>Methods</h4>We estimated brain age in 2 studies focusing on early stages of schizophrenia or BD. In the first study, we recruited 43 participants with first episode of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (FES) and 43 controls. In the second study, we included 96 offspring of bipolar parents (48 unaffected, 48 affected) and 60 controls. We used relevance vector regression trained on an independent sample of 504 controls to estimate the brain age of study participants from structural MRI. We calculated the brain-age gap estimate (BrainAGE) score by subtracting the chronological age from the brain age.<h4>Results</h4>Participants with FES had higher BrainAGE scores than controls (F(1, 83) = 8.79, corrected P = .008, Cohen's d = 0.64). Their brain age was on average 2.64 ± 4.15 years greater than their chronological age (matched t(42) = 4.36, P < .001). In contrast, participants at risk or in the early stages of BD showed comparable BrainAGE scores to controls (F(2,149) = 1.04, corrected P = .70, ?2 = 0.01) and comparable brain and chronological age.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Early stages of schizophrenia, but not early stages of BD, were associated with advanced BrainAGE scores. Participants with FES showed neurostructural alterations, which made their brains appear 2.64 years older than their chronological age. BrainAGE scores could aid in early differential diagnosis between BD and schizophrenia.
Project description:Compensation implies the recruitment of additional neuronal resources to prevent the detrimental effect of age-related neuronal decline on cognition. Recently suggested statistical models comprise behavioral performance, brain activation, and measures related to aging- or disease-specific pathological burden to characterize compensation. Higher chronological age as well as the APOE ?4 allele are risk factors for Alzheimer's disease. A more biological approach to characterize aging compared with chronological age is the brain age gap estimation (BrainAGE), taking into account structural brain characteristics. We utilized this estimate in an fMRI experiment together with APOE variant as measures related to pathological burden and aimed at identifying compensatory regions during working memory (WM) processing in a group of 34 healthy older adults. According to published compensation criteria, better performance along with increased brain activation would indicate successful compensation. We examined the moderating effects of BrainAGE on the relationship between task performance and brain activation in prefrontal cortex, as previous studies suggest predominantly frontal compensatory activation. Then we statistically compared them to the effects of chronological age (CA) tested in a previous study. Moreover, we examined the effects of adding APOE variant as a further moderator. Herewith, we strived to uncover neuronal compensation in healthy older adults at risk for neurodegenerative disease. Higher BrainAGE alone was not associated with an increased recruitment in prefrontal cortex. When adding APOE variant as a second moderator, we found an interaction of BrainAGE and APOE variant, such that ?4 carriers recruited right inferior frontal gyrus with higher BrainAGE to maintain WM performance, thus showing a pattern compatible with successful neuronal compensation. Exploratory analyses yielded similar patterns in left inferior and bilateral middle frontal gyrus. These results contrast those from a previous study, where we found no indication of compensation in prefrontal cortex in ?4 carriers with increasing CA. We conclude that BrainAGE together with APOE variant can help to reveal potential neuronal compensation in healthy older adults. Previous results on neuronal compensation in frontal areas corroborate our findings. Compensatory brain regions could be targeted in affected individuals by training or stimulation protocols to maintain cognitive functioning as long as possible.
Project description:Structural brain abnormalities are central to schizophrenia (SZ), but it remains unknown whether they are linked to dysmaturational processes crossing diagnostic boundaries, aggravating across disease stages, and driving the neurodiagnostic signature of the illness. Therefore, we investigated whether patients with SZ (N = 141), major depression (MD; N = 104), borderline personality disorder (BPD; N = 57), and individuals in at-risk mental states for psychosis (ARMS; N = 89) deviated from the trajectory of normal brain maturation. This deviation was measured as difference between chronological and the neuroanatomical age (brain age gap estimation [BrainAGE]). Neuroanatomical age was determined by a machine learning system trained to individually estimate age from the structural magnetic resonance imagings of 800 healthy controls. Group-level analyses showed that BrainAGE was highest in SZ (+5.5 y) group, followed by MD (+4.0), BPD (+3.1), and the ARMS (+1.7) groups. Earlier disease onset in MD and BPD groups correlated with more pronounced BrainAGE, reaching effect sizes of the SZ group. Second, BrainAGE increased across at-risk, recent onset, and recurrent states of SZ. Finally, BrainAGE predicted both patient status as well as negative and disorganized symptoms. These findings suggest that an individually quantifiable "accelerated aging" effect may particularly impact on the neuroanatomical signature of SZ but may extend also to other mental disorders.
Project description:Aging alters brain structure and function. Personal health markers and modifiable lifestyle factors are related to individual brain aging as well as to the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD). This study used a novel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based biomarker to assess the effects of 17 health markers on individual brain aging in cognitively unimpaired elderly subjects. By employing kernel regression methods, the expression of normal brain-aging patterns forms the basis to estimate the brain age of a given new subject. If the estimated age is higher than the chronological age, a positive brain age gap estimation (BrainAGE) score indicates accelerated atrophy and is considered a risk factor for developing AD. Within this cross-sectional, multi-center study 228 cognitively unimpaired elderly subjects (118 males) completed an MRI at 1.5Tesla, physiological and blood parameter assessments. The multivariate regression model combining all measured parameters was capable of explaining 39% of BrainAGE variance in males (p < 0.001) and 32% in females (p < 0.01). Furthermore, markers of the metabolic syndrome as well as markers of liver and kidney functions were profoundly related to BrainAGE scores in males (p < 0.05). In females, markers of liver and kidney functions as well as supply of vitamin B12 were significantly related to BrainAGE (p < 0.05). In conclusion, in cognitively unimpaired elderly subjects several clinical markers of poor health were associated with subtle structural changes in the brain that reflect accelerated aging, whereas protective effects on brain aging were observed for markers of good health. Additionally, the relations between individual brain aging and miscellaneous health markers show gender-specific patterns. The BrainAGE approach may thus serve as a clinically relevant biomarker for the detection of subtly abnormal patterns of brain aging probably preceding cognitive decline and development of AD.
Project description:Brain age prediction based on imaging data and machine learning (ML) methods has great potential to provide insights into the development of cognition and mental disorders. Though different ML models have been proposed, a systematic comparison of ML models in combination with imaging features derived from different modalities is still needed. In this study, we evaluate the prediction performance of 36 combinations of imaging features and ML models including deep learning. We utilize single and multimodal brain imaging data including MRI, DTI, and rs-fMRI from a large data set with 839 subjects. Our study is a follow-up to the initial work (Liang et al., 2019. Human Brain Mapping) to investigate different analytic strategies to combine data from MRI, DTI, and rs-fMRI with the goal to improve brain age prediction accuracy. Additionally, the traditional approach to predicting the brain age gap has been shown to have a systematic bias. The potential nonlinear relationship between the brain age gap and chronological age has not been thoroughly tested. Here we propose a new method to correct the systematic bias of brain age gap by taking gender, chronological age, and their interactions into consideration. As the true brain age is unknown and may deviate from chronological age, we further examine whether various levels of behavioral performance across subjects predict their brain age estimated from neuroimaging data. This is an important step to quantify the practical implication of brain age prediction. Our findings are helpful to advance the practice of optimizing different analytic methodologies in brain age prediction.
Project description:The human electroencephalogram (EEG) of sleep undergoes profound changes with age. These changes can be conceptualized as "brain age (BA)," which can be compared to chronological age to reflect the degree of deviation from normal aging. Here, we develop an interpretable machine learning model to predict BA based on 2 large sleep EEG data sets: the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) sleep lab data set (N = 2532; ages 18-80); and the Sleep Heart Health Study (SHHS, N = 1974; ages 40-80). The model obtains a mean absolute deviation of 7.6 years between BA and chronological age (CA) in healthy participants in the MGH data set. As validation, a subset of SHHS containing longitudinal EEGs 5.2 years apart shows an average of 5.4 years increase in BA. Participants with significant neurological or psychiatric disease exhibit a mean excess BA, or "brain age index" (BAI = BA-CA) of 4 years relative to healthy controls. Participants with hypertension and diabetes have a mean excess BA of 3.5 years. The findings raise the prospect of using the sleep EEG as a potential biomarker for healthy brain aging.
Project description:Background: Individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) vary in their response to antidepressants. However, identifying objective biomarkers, prior to or early in the course of treatment that can predict antidepressant efficacy, remains a challenge. Methods: Individuals with MDD participated in a 12-week antidepressant pharmacotherapy trial. Electroencephalographic (EEG) data was collected before and 1 week post-treatment initiation in 51 patients. Response status at week 12 was established with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale (MADRS), with a ?50% decrease characterizing responders (N = 27/24 responders/non-responders). We used a machine learning (ML)-approach for predicting response status. We focused on Random Forests, though other ML methods were compared. First, we used a tree-based estimator to select a relatively small number of significant features from: (a) demographic/clinical data (age, sex, individual item/total MADRS scores at baseline, week 1, change scores); (b) scalp-level EEG power; (c) source-localized current density (via exact low-resolution electromagnetic tomography [eLORETA] software). Second, we applied kernel principal component analysis to reduce and map important features. Third, a set of ML models were constructed to classify response outcome based on mapped features. For each dataset, predictive features were extracted, followed by a model of all predictive features, and finally by a model of the most predictive features. Results: Fifty eLORETA features were predictive of response (across bands, both time-points); alpha1/theta eLORETA features showed the highest predictive value. Eighty-eight scalp EEG features were predictive of response (across bands, both time-points), with theta/alpha2 being most predictive. Clinical/demographic data consisted of 31 features, with the most important being week 1 "concentration difficulty" scores. When all features were included into one model, its predictive utility was high (88% accuracy). When the most important features were extracted in the final model, 12 predictive features emerged (78% accuracy), including baseline scalp-EEG frontopolar theta, parietal alpha2 and frontopolar alpha1. Conclusions: These findings suggest that ML models of pre- and early treatment-emergent EEG profiles and clinical features can serve as tools for predicting antidepressant response. While this must be replicated using large independent samples, it lays the groundwork for research on personalized, "biomarker"-based treatment approaches.