Mihály Bányai, Vaibhav Diwadkar and Péter Érdi

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM) for fMRI
Advertisements

Bayesian inference Lee Harrison York Neuroimaging Centre 01 / 05 / 2009.
Dynamic causal Modelling for evoked responses Stefan Kiebel Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging UCL.
Cerebral Glucose Metabolism in Obsessive-Compulsive Hoarding
Bayesian models for fMRI data
Dynamic Causal Modelling for ERP/ERFs Valentina Doria Georg Kaegi Methods for Dummies 19/03/2008.
What do you need to know about DCM for ERPs/ERFs to be able to use it?
INTRODUCTION Assessing the size of objects rapidly and accurately clearly has survival value. Thus, a central multi-sensory module for magnitude assessment.
Dissociable neural mechanisms supporting visual short-term memory for objects Xu, Y. & Chun, M. M. (2006) Nature, 440,
Dynamic Causal Modelling THEORY SPM Course FIL, London October 2009 Hanneke den Ouden Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging Radboud University.
Chapter 11: Cognition and neuroanatomy. Three general questions 1.How is the brain anatomically organized? 2.How is the mind functionally organized? 3.How.
Statistical Models for the Analysis of Brain Connectivity Based on fMRI Data Yoshio Takane McGill University and University of Victoria September 19, 2013.
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM): Theory Demis Hassabis & Hanneke den Ouden Thanks to Klaas Enno Stephan Functional Imaging Lab Wellcome Dept. of Imaging.
FMRI Methods Lecture7 – Review: analyses & statistics.
18 th February 2009 Stephanie Burnett Christian Lambert Methods for Dummies 2009 Dynamic Causal Modelling Part I: Theory.
Human perception and recognition of metric changes of part-based dynamic novel objects Quoc C. Vuong, Johannes Schultz, & Lewis Chuang Max Planck Institute.
Functional Connectivity in an fMRI Working Memory Task in High-functioning Autism (Koshino et al., 2005) Computational Modeling of Intelligence (Fri)
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM) Marta I. Garrido Thanks to: Karl J. Friston, Klaas E. Stephan, Andre C. Marreiros, Stefan J. Kiebel,
Dynamic Causal Modelling Introduction SPM Course (fMRI), October 2015 Peter Zeidman Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London.
Ch. 5 Bayesian Treatment of Neuroimaging Data Will Penny and Karl Friston Ch. 5 Bayesian Treatment of Neuroimaging Data Will Penny and Karl Friston 18.
Dynamic Causal Model for evoked responses in MEG/EEG Rosalyn Moran.
1 Tom Edgar’s Contribution to Model Reduction as an introduction to Global Sensitivity Analysis Procedure Accounting for Effect of Available Experimental.
Bayesian inference Lee Harrison York Neuroimaging Centre 23 / 10 / 2009.
Introduction  Recent neuroimaging studies of memory retrieval have reported the activation of a medial and left – lateralised memory network that includes.
Dynamic Causal Modeling (DCM) A Practical Perspective Ollie Hulme Barrie Roulston Zeki lab.
Figure 5: Change in Blackjack Posterior Distributions over Time.
Authors: Peter W. Battaglia, Robert A. Jacobs, and Richard N. Aslin
COMPARISON OF OPTICAL AND fMRI MEASURES OF NEUROVASCULAR COUPLING
Contrast and Inferences
5th March 2008 Andreina Mendez Stephanie Burnett
Effective Connectivity: Basics
Richard Coppola3, Daniel Weinberger4,5, Danielle S. Bassett1,6
Effective Connectivity
The General Linear Model (GLM): the marriage between linear systems and stats FFA.
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM): Theory
Hippocampal Attractor Dynamics Predict Memory-Based Decision Making
Xaq Pitkow, Dora E. Angelaki  Neuron 
Dynamic Causal Model for evoked responses in M/EEG Rosalyn Moran.
Effective Connectivity between Hippocampus and Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex Controls Preferential Choices from Memory  Sebastian Gluth, Tobias Sommer,
Volume 21, Issue 19, Pages (October 2011)
Daphna Shohamy, Anthony D. Wagner  Neuron 
The free-energy principle: a rough guide to the brain? K Friston
Predicting Value of Pain and Analgesia: Nucleus Accumbens Response to Noxious Stimuli Changes in the Presence of Chronic Pain  Marwan N. Baliki, Paul.
Zillah Boraston and Disa Sauter 31st May 2006
Dynamic Causal Modelling for M/EEG
Dynamic Causal Modelling
Attentional Modulations Related to Spatial Gating but Not to Allocation of Limited Resources in Primate V1  Yuzhi Chen, Eyal Seidemann  Neuron  Volume.
Intrinsic and Task-Evoked Network Architectures of the Human Brain
Neural Correlates of Visual Working Memory
Visual Cortex Extrastriate Body-Selective Area Activation in Congenitally Blind People “Seeing” by Using Sounds  Ella Striem-Amit, Amir Amedi  Current.
Benedikt Zoefel, Alan Archer-Boyd, Matthew H. Davis  Current Biology 
Between Thoughts and Actions: Motivationally Salient Cues Invigorate Mental Action in the Human Brain  Avi Mendelsohn, Alex Pine, Daniela Schiller  Neuron 
Effective Connectivity
Volume 81, Issue 5, Pages (March 2014)
Wallis, JD Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute UC, Berkeley
Adam P.R. Smith, Klaas E. Stephan, Michael D. Rugg, Raymond J. Dolan 
Uma R. Karmarkar, Dean V. Buonomano  Neuron 
Boosting Signal-to-Noise in Complex Biology: Prior Knowledge Is Power
Types of Brain Connectivity By Amnah Mahroo
Computer Vision in Cell Biology
Dynamic Causal Modelling for evoked responses
Probabilistic Modelling of Brain Imaging Data
Will Penny Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging,
DCM Demo – Model Specification, Inversion and 2nd Level Inference
Group DCM analysis for cognitive & clinical studies
Predicting Value of Pain and Analgesia: Nucleus Accumbens Response to Noxious Stimuli Changes in the Presence of Chronic Pain  Marwan N. Baliki, Paul.
Hippocampal-Prefrontal Theta Oscillations Support Memory Integration
Volume 34, Issue 4, Pages (May 2002)
Neuroimaging Impaired Response Inhibition and Salience Attribution in Human Drug Addiction: A Systematic Review  Anna Zilverstand, Anna S. Huang, Nelly.
Presentation transcript:

Mihály Bányai, Vaibhav Diwadkar and Péter Érdi Functional Disconnectivity in Schizophrenia: a (Macro-)Systems Biological Approach Mihály Bányai, Vaibhav Diwadkar and Péter Érdi banmi@rmki.kfki.hu vaibhav.diwadkar@gmail.com perdi@kzoo.edu

Abstract Systems biology in the sense of Robert Rosen connects microscopic and macroscopic systems, and our studies is in accordance with his spirit. Schizophrenia is often regarded as a set of symptoms caused by impairments in the connectivity of the information processing macro-networks of the brain. To investigate this hypothesis, an fMRI study involving an associative learning task was conducted with schizophrenia patients and controls. A set of generative models of the BOLD signal generation were defined to describe the interaction of five brain regions and the experimental conditions. The models were fitted to the data using Bayesian model inversion. The comparison of different model connectivity structures lead to the finding that in schizophrenia there is an overall complexity reduction of the information processing structure. Parameter-level analysis also pointed out that there are significant impairments in the top-down control flow in patients. Disconnectivity, observed between brain regions in schizophrenic patients could result from abnormal modulation of (NMDA-dependent plasticity implicated in schizophrenia. New pharmacological strategies should be suggested by using multi-scale mathematical modeling technique by integrating macro network level description with detailed kinetic models of drug effects on NMDA receptors.

Systems biological framework Applied to the study of cognitive control deficit and possible repair in schizophrenia

Experiment – The task - 11 subjects with schizophrenia and 11 healthy controls - visual associative learning task: objects in the cells of a 3-by-3 grid - Encoding phase: the objects were shown on their places one by one - Retrieval phase: only cues were given, patients had to tell what was the object in the cell - phases were separated by resting periods. - 8 learning epochs in a row.

Experiment - Results Behavioral differences Data preparation - Schizophrenia patients were able to learn the task - their learning curve converges slower compared to healthy controls Data preparation - fMRI data were preprocessed and analyzed using a standard processing sequence - Time series were extracted using a thresholded effects of interest contrast - stereotactic region-of-interest maps

Dynamic Causal Modeling Neural activity dynamics considering the effects of experimental conditions Mapping from neural activity to BOLD signal (nonlinear) 𝑥 ˙ = 𝐴+ ∑ 𝑖=1 𝑁 𝑢 𝑗 𝐵 𝑗 𝑥+𝐶𝑢 𝑦=λ 𝑥, θ ℎ

Bayesian parameter estimation Assumption: all distributions are Gaussian Approximation method: Expectation Maximization Model comparison Goodness measure: model evidence Approximation method: variational Bayesian 𝑝 θ∣𝑦,𝑀 = 𝑝 𝑦∣θ,𝑀 𝑝 θ∣𝑀 𝑝 𝑦∣𝑀 θ={𝐴,𝐵,𝐶, θ ℎ } 𝑝 𝑦∣𝑀 =∫𝑝 𝑦∣θ,𝑀 𝑝 θ∣𝑀 𝑑θ

Models to compare Input conditions: presence of a visual stimulus (Visual), encoding phase (Encoding), retrieval phase (Retrieval) and the epoch number (Time) Two streams of connections: data stream lower level -> higher level, black on above figure, fixed in the models control stream higher level -> lower level, black on above figure, varied in the models First model set: different intrinsic connectivity combinations (A matrix in DCM) Second model set: different modulatory effects of input conditions (B matrix in DCM)

Results – model structure level - Model evidences -> Posterior probabilty densities over the model sets - subjects within group are not assumed to have the same structure Control group - clear winnert - the model containing most connections Patient group - no clear winner - most probable models lack connections in the control stream.

Results – parameter level - comparing effective connectivity parameters - reference model was selected (above). The significance values come from two- sided t-tests on the samples of the two groups. Significant differences: - prefronto-hippocampal pathway - hippocampo-inferior temporal pathway - the context-dependent modulation of those by the learning procedure.

Correlation with behaviour How are the DCM model parameters correlated with learning performance of the subjects? Fitted to performance data k - the learning rate: - Spearman rank correlation - averaged over subjects. most correlated: - hippocampo-parietal pathway - hippocampo-inferior temporal connectivityduring encoding. 𝑙 𝑡 =1− 𝑒 −𝑘𝑥

Illnes or slow learning? Common probelm in learning experiments: are the differences there due to the disorder, or some subjects are naturally slow learners? - subjects in control group with no better performance than patients (3 people). - model comparison for these subjects separately Posterior probability distribution of models: - same as for control group - different from patient group The method is capable of: - capturing the underlying structure of the illness - separate it from slow learning despite of the similar performance

Conclusions - An associative learning task was performed by schizphrenia patients and healthy controls, patients performed worse. - Several connectivity models of the BOLD signal generation were defined by DCM and fitted to measurement. - The information processing neworks implemented by patients proved to be fundamentally different than the controls'. - Impairment in the prefronto-hippocampal and hippocampo- inferiontemporal pathways, which play an important role in the cognitive control of associative memory formation. -The connection strengths are positively correlated with learning performance. - The method is able to differentiate natural slow learning and illness.