Janne M. Papma

Wenjie Kang, Bo Li, Janne M. Papma et al.

Machine learning methods have shown large potential for the automatic early diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). However, some machine learning methods based on imaging data have poor interpretability because it is usually unclear how they make their decisions. Explainable Boosting Machines (EBMs) are interpretable machine learning models based on the statistical framework of generalized additive modeling, but have so far only been used for tabular data. Therefore, we propose a framework that combines the strength of EBM with high-dimensional imaging data using deep learning-based feature extraction. The proposed framework is interpretable because it provides the importance of each feature. We validated the proposed framework on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset, achieving accuracy of 0.883 and area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.970 on AD and control classification. Furthermore, we validated the proposed framework on an external testing set, achieving accuracy of 0.778 and AUC of 0.887 on AD and subjective cognitive decline (SCD) classification. The proposed framework significantly outperformed an EBM model using volume biomarkers instead of deep learning-based features, as well as an end-to-end convolutional neural network (CNN) with optimized architecture.

Esther E. Bron, Stefan Klein, Annika Reinke et al.

Machine learning methods exploiting multi-parametric biomarkers, especially based on neuroimaging, have huge potential to improve early diagnosis of dementia and to predict which individuals are at-risk of developing dementia. To benchmark algorithms in the field of machine learning and neuroimaging in dementia and assess their potential for use in clinical practice and clinical trials, seven grand challenges have been organized in the last decade. The seven grand challenges addressed questions related to screening, clinical status estimation, prediction and monitoring in (pre-clinical) dementia. There was little overlap in clinical questions, tasks and performance metrics. Whereas this aids providing insight on a broad range of questions, it also limits the validation of results across challenges. The validation process itself was mostly comparable between challenges, using similar methods for ensuring objective comparison, uncertainty estimation and statistical testing. In general, winning algorithms performed rigorous data preprocessing and combined a wide range of input features. Despite high state-of-the-art performances, most of the methods evaluated by the challenges are not clinically used. To increase impact, future challenges could pay more attention to statistical analysis of which factors relate to higher performance, to clinical questions beyond Alzheimer's disease, and to using testing data beyond the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Grand challenges would be an ideal venue for assessing the generalizability of algorithm performance to unseen data of other cohorts. Key for increasing impact in this way are larger testing data sizes, which could be reached by sharing algorithms rather than data to exploit data that cannot be shared.