Cargando…
Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages
Brain age prediction algorithms using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) aim to assess the biological age of the human brain. The difference between a person's chronological age and the estimated brain age is thought to reflect deviations from a normal aging trajectory, indicating a sl...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619370/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37843020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.26502 |
_version_ | 1785129974181658624 |
---|---|
author | Dörfel, Ruben P. Arenas‐Gomez, Joan M. Fisher, Patrick M. Ganz, Melanie Knudsen, Gitte M. Svensson, Jonas E. Plavén‐Sigray, Pontus |
author_facet | Dörfel, Ruben P. Arenas‐Gomez, Joan M. Fisher, Patrick M. Ganz, Melanie Knudsen, Gitte M. Svensson, Jonas E. Plavén‐Sigray, Pontus |
author_sort | Dörfel, Ruben P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Brain age prediction algorithms using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) aim to assess the biological age of the human brain. The difference between a person's chronological age and the estimated brain age is thought to reflect deviations from a normal aging trajectory, indicating a slower or accelerated biological aging process. Several pre‐trained software packages for predicting brain age are publicly available. In this study, we perform a comparison of such packages with respect to (1) predictive accuracy, (2) test–retest reliability, and (3) the ability to track age progression over time. We evaluated the six brain age prediction packages: brainageR, DeepBrainNet, brainage, ENIGMA, pyment, and mccqrnn. The accuracy and test–retest reliability were assessed on MRI data from 372 healthy people aged between 18.4 and 86.2 years (mean 38.7 ± 17.5 years). All packages showed significant correlations between predicted brain age and chronological age (r = 0.66–0.97, p < 0.001), with pyment displaying the strongest correlation. The mean absolute error was between 3.56 (pyment) and 9.54 years (ENIGMA). brainageR, pyment, and mccqrnn were superior in terms of reliability (ICC values between 0.94–0.98), as well as predicting age progression over a longer time span. Of the six packages, pyment and brainageR consistently showed the highest accuracy and test–retest reliability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10619370 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106193702023-11-02 Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages Dörfel, Ruben P. Arenas‐Gomez, Joan M. Fisher, Patrick M. Ganz, Melanie Knudsen, Gitte M. Svensson, Jonas E. Plavén‐Sigray, Pontus Hum Brain Mapp Research Articles Brain age prediction algorithms using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) aim to assess the biological age of the human brain. The difference between a person's chronological age and the estimated brain age is thought to reflect deviations from a normal aging trajectory, indicating a slower or accelerated biological aging process. Several pre‐trained software packages for predicting brain age are publicly available. In this study, we perform a comparison of such packages with respect to (1) predictive accuracy, (2) test–retest reliability, and (3) the ability to track age progression over time. We evaluated the six brain age prediction packages: brainageR, DeepBrainNet, brainage, ENIGMA, pyment, and mccqrnn. The accuracy and test–retest reliability were assessed on MRI data from 372 healthy people aged between 18.4 and 86.2 years (mean 38.7 ± 17.5 years). All packages showed significant correlations between predicted brain age and chronological age (r = 0.66–0.97, p < 0.001), with pyment displaying the strongest correlation. The mean absolute error was between 3.56 (pyment) and 9.54 years (ENIGMA). brainageR, pyment, and mccqrnn were superior in terms of reliability (ICC values between 0.94–0.98), as well as predicting age progression over a longer time span. Of the six packages, pyment and brainageR consistently showed the highest accuracy and test–retest reliability. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2023-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10619370/ /pubmed/37843020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.26502 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Human Brain Mapping published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Dörfel, Ruben P. Arenas‐Gomez, Joan M. Fisher, Patrick M. Ganz, Melanie Knudsen, Gitte M. Svensson, Jonas E. Plavén‐Sigray, Pontus Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
title | Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
title_full | Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
title_fullStr | Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
title_full_unstemmed | Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
title_short | Prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: A comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
title_sort | prediction of brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging: a comparison of accuracy and test–retest reliability of publicly available software packages |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619370/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37843020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.26502 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dorfelrubenp predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages AT arenasgomezjoanm predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages AT fisherpatrickm predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages AT ganzmelanie predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages AT knudsengittem predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages AT svenssonjonase predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages AT plavensigraypontus predictionofbrainageusingstructuralmagneticresonanceimagingacomparisonofaccuracyandtestretestreliabilityofpubliclyavailablesoftwarepackages |