Improving the reliability of single-subject fMRI by weighting intra-run variability

Multimodal integrated approaches in low grade glioma surgery

Surgical management of Diffuse Low-Grade Gliomas (DLGGs) has radically changed in the last 20 years. Awake surgery (AS) in combination with Direct Electrical Stimulation (DES) and real-time neuropsychological testing (RTNT) permits continuous intraoperative feedback, thus allowing to increase the extent of resection (EOR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the technological advancements and integration of multidisciplinary techniques on EOR. Two hundred and eighty-eight patients affected by DLGG were enrolled. Cases were stratified according to the surgical protocol that changed over time: 1. DES; 2. DES plus functional MRI/DTI images fused on a NeuroNavigation system; 3. Protocol 2 plus RTNT. Patients belonging to Protocol 1 had a median EOR of 83% (28–100), while those belonging to Protocol 2 and 3 had a median EOR of 88% (34–100) and 98% (50–100) respectively (p = 0.0001). New transient deficits with Protocol 1, 2 and 3 were noted in 38.96%, 34.31% and 31,08% of cases, and permanent deficits in 6.49%, 3.65% and 2.7% respectively. The average follow-up period was 6.8 years. OS was influenced by molecular class (p = 0.028), EOR (p = 0.018) and preoperative tumor growing pattern (p = 0.004). Multimodal surgical approach can provide a safer and wider removal of DLGG with potential subsequent benefits on OS. Further studies are necessary to corroborate our findings.

High-resolution fMRI at 7 Tesla: challenges, promises and recent developments for individual-focused fMRI studies

Limited detection power has been a bottleneck for subject-specific functional MRI (fMRI) studies, however the higher signal-to-noise ratio afforded by ultra-high magnetic fields (≥ 7 Tesla) provides levels of sensitivity and resolution needed to study individual subjects. What may be surprising is that higher imaging resolution may provide both higher specificity and sensitivity due to reductions in partial volume effects and reduced physiological noise. However, challenges remain to ensure high data quality and to reduce variability in ultra-high field fMRI. We discuss session-specific biases including those caused by factors related to instrumentation, anatomy, and physiology-which can translate into variability across sessions-and how to minimize these to help ultra-high field fMRI reach its full potential for individual-focused studies.

Current Challenges in Translational and Clinical fMRI and Future Directions

Translational neuroscience is an important field that brings together clinical praxis with neuroscience methods. In this review article, the focus will be on functional neuroimaging (fMRI) and its applicability in clinical fMRI studies. In the light of the "replication crisis," three aspects will be critically discussed: First, the fMRI signal itself, second, current fMRI praxis, and, third, the next generation of analysis strategies. Current attempts such as resting-state fMRI, meta-analyses, and machine learning will be discussed with their advantages and potential pitfalls and disadvantages. One major concern is that the fMRI signal shows substantial within- and between-subject variability, which affects the reliability of both task-related, but in particularly resting-state fMRI studies. Furthermore, the lack of standardized acquisition and analysis methods hinders the further development of clinical relevant approaches. However, meta-analyses and machine-learning approaches may help to overcome current shortcomings in the methods by identifying new, and yet hidden relationships, and may help to build new models on disorder mechanisms. Furthermore, better control of parameters that may have an influence on the fMRI signal and that can easily be controlled for, like blood pressure, heart rate, diet, time of day, might improve reliability substantially.

Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses

Computational neuroimaging methods aim to predict brain responses (measured e.g. with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]) on the basis of stimulus features obtained through computational models. The accuracy of such prediction is used as an indicator of how well the model describes the computations underlying the brain function that is being considered. However, the prediction accuracy is bounded by the proportion of the variance of the brain response which is related to the measurement noise and not to the stimuli (or cognitive functions). This bound to the performance of a computational model has been referred to as the noise ceiling. In previous fMRI applications two methods have been proposed to estimate the noise ceiling based on either a split-half procedure or Monte Carlo simulations. These methods make different assumptions over the nature of the effects underlying the data, and, importantly, their relation has not been clarified yet. Here, we derive an analytical form for the noise ceiling that does not require computationally expensive simulations or a splitting procedure that reduce the amount of data. The validity of this analytical definition is proved in simulations, we show that the analytical solution results in the same estimate of the noise ceiling as the Monte Carlo method. Considering different simulated noise structure, we evaluate different estimators of the variance of the responses and their impact on the estimation of the noise ceiling. We furthermore evaluate the interplay between regularization (often used to estimate model fits to the data when the number of computational features in the model is large) and model complexity on the performance with respect to the noise ceiling. Our results indicate that when considering the variance of the responses across runs, computing the noise ceiling analytically results in similar estimates as the split half estimator and approaches the true noise ceiling under a variety of simulated noise scenarios. Finally, the methods are tested on real fMRI data acquired at 7 Tesla.

Encoding computational models in brain responses measured with fMRI allows testing the algorithmic representations carried out by the neural population within voxels. The accuracy of a model in predicting new responses is used as a measure of the brain validity of the computational model being tested, but the result of this analysis is determined not only by how precisely the model describes the responses but also by the quality of the data. In this article, we evaluate existing approaches to estimate the best possible accuracy that any computational model can achieve conditioned to the amount of measurement noise that is present in the experimental data (i.e. the noise ceiling). Additionally we introduce a close form estimation of the noise ceiling that does not require computationally or data expensive procedures. All the methods are compared using simulated and real fMRI data. We draw conclusions over the impact of regularization procedures and make practical recommendations on how to report the results of computational models in neuroimaging.

fMRI data processing in MRTOOL: to what extent does anatomical registration affect the reliability of functional results?

Spatial registration is an essential step in the analysis of fMRI data because it enables between-subject analyses of brain activity, measured either during task performance or in the resting state. In this study, we investigated how anatomical registration with MRTOOL affects the reliability of task-related fMRI activity. We used as a benchmark the results from two other spatial registration methods implemented in SPM12: the Unified Segmentation algorithm and the DARTEL toolbox. Structural alignment accuracy and the impact on functional activation maps were assessed with high-resolution T1-weighted images and a set of task-related functional volumes acquired in 10 healthy volunteers. Our findings confirmed that anatomical registration is a crucial step in fMRI data processing, contributing significantly to the total inter-subject variance of the activation maps. MRTOOL and DARTEL provided greater registration accuracy than Unified Segmentation. Although DARTEL had superior gray matter and white matter tissue alignment than MRTOOL, there were no significant differences between DARTEL and MRTOOL in test-retest reliability. Likewise, we found only limited differences in BOLD activation morphology between MRTOOL and DARTEL. The test-retest reliability of task-related responses was comparable between MRTOOL and DARTEL, and both proved superior to Unified Segmentation. We conclude that MRTOOL, which is suitable for single-subject processing of structural and functional MR images, is a valid alternative to other SPM12-based approaches that are intended for group analysis. MRTOOL now includes a normalization module for fMRI data and is freely available to the scientific community.