Back to Authors

Shah, Jay

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3617-2395

Mayo Clinic

Arizona State University

Citations 12

Headache classification and automatic biomarker extraction from structural MRIs using deep learning
Siddiquee, Md Mahfuzur Rahman , Shah, Jay , Nikolova, Simona , Li, Baojie , Rahman Siddiquee, Md Mahfuzur , Chong, Catherine, Chong, Catherine D. , Dumkrieger, Gina , Wu, Teresa , Schwedt, Todd J.

Brain Communications | November 28, 2022 | Volume: 5 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/braincomms/fcac311 Get It

AbstractData-driven machine-learning methods on neuroimaging (e.g. MRI) are of great interest for the investigation and classification of neurological diseases. However, traditional machine learning requires domain knowledge to delineate the brain regions first, followed by feature extraction from the regions. Compared with this semi-automated approach, recently developed deep learning methods have advantages since they do not require such prior knowledge; instead, deep learning methods can automatically find features that differentiate MRIs from different cohorts. In the present study, we developed a deep learning-based classification pipeline distinguishing brain MRIs of individuals with one of three types of headaches [migraine (n = 95), acute post-traumatic headache (n = 48) and persistent post-traumatic headache (n = 49)] from those of healthy controls (n = 532) and identified the brain regions that most contributed to each classification task. Our pipeline included: (i) data preprocessing; (ii) binary classification of healthy controls versus headache type using a 3D ResNet-18; and (iii) biomarker extraction from the trained 3D ResNet-18. During the classification at the second step of our pipeline, we resolved two common issues in deep learning methods, limited training data and imbalanced samples from different categories, by incorporating a large public data set and resampling among the headache cohorts. Our method achieved the following classification accuracies when tested on independent test sets: (i) migraine versus healthy controls—75% accuracy, 66.7% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity; (2) acute post-traumatic headache versus healthy controls—75% accuracy, 66.7% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity; and (3) persistent post-traumatic headache versus healthy controls—91.7% accuracy, 100% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity. The most significant biomarkers identified by the classifier for migraine were caudate, caudal anterior cingulate, superior frontal, thalamus and ventral diencephalon. For acute post-traumatic headache, lateral occipital, cuneus, lingual, pericalcarine and superior parietal regions were identified as most significant biomarkers. Finally, for persistent post-traumatic headache, the most significant biomarkers were cerebellum, middle temporal, inferior temporal, inferior parietal and superior parietal. In conclusion, our study shows that the deep learning methods can automatically detect aberrations in the brain regions associated with different headache types. It does not require any human knowledge as input which significantly reduces human effort. It uncovers the great potential of deep learning methods for classification and automatic extraction of brain imaging–based biomarkers for these headache types.
Deep residual inception encoder‐decoder network for amyloid PET harmonization
Shah, Jay , Gao, Fei , Ghisays, Valentina , Luo, Ji , Chen, Yinghua , Lee, Wendy , Zhou, Yuxiang, Reiman, Eric M. , Li, Baoxin , Zhou, Yuxiang , Benzinger, Tammie L.S. , Chen, Kewei , Su, Yi , Wu, Teresa

Alzheimer's & Dementia | February 10, 2022 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 2448-2457

10.1002/alz.12564 Get It

AbstractIntroductionMultiple positron emission tomography (PET) tracers are available for amyloid imaging, posing a significant challenge to consensus interpretation and quantitative analysis. We accordingly developed and validated a deep learning model as a harmonization strategy.MethodA Residual Inception Encoder‐Decoder Neural Network was developed to harmonize images between amyloid PET image pairs made with Pittsburgh Compound‐B and florbetapir tracers. The model was trained using a dataset with 92 subjects with 10‐fold cross validation and its generalizability was further examined using an independent external dataset of 46 subjects.ResultsSignificantly stronger between‐tracer correlations (P < .001) were observed after harmonization for both global amyloid burden indices and voxel‐wise measurements in the training cohort and the external testing cohort.DiscussionWe proposed and validated a novel encoder‐decoder based deep model to harmonize amyloid PET imaging data from different tracers. Further investigation is ongoing to improve the model and apply to additional tracers.