1
|
Yoshino A, Maekawa T, Kato M, Chan HL, Otsuru N, Yamawaki S. Changes in Resting-State Brain Activity After Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Pain: A Magnetoencephalography Study. THE JOURNAL OF PAIN 2024; 25:104523. [PMID: 38582288 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104523] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2023] [Revised: 03/18/2024] [Accepted: 04/01/2024] [Indexed: 04/08/2024]
Abstract
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is believed to be an effective treatment for chronic pain due to its association with cognitive and emotional factors. Nevertheless, there is a paucity of magnetoencephalography (MEG) investigations elucidating its underlying mechanisms. This study investigated the neurophysiological effects of CBT employing MEG and analytical techniques. We administered resting-state MEG scans to 30 patients with chronic pain and 31 age-matched healthy controls. Patients engaged in a 12-session group CBT program. We conducted pretreatment (T1) and post-treatment (T2) MEG and clinical assessments. MEG data were examined within predefined regions of interest, guided by the authors' and others' prior magnetic resonance imaging studies. Initially, we selected regions displaying significant changes in power spectral density and multiscale entropy between patients at T1 and healthy controls. Then, we examined the changes within these regions after conducting CBT. Furthermore, we applied support vector machine analysis to MEG data to assess the potential for classifying treatment effects. We observed normalization of power in the gamma2 band (61-90 Hz) within the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and multiscale entropy within the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) of patients with chronic pain after CBT. Notably, changes in pain intensity before and after CBT positively correlated with the alterations of multiscale entropy. Importantly, responders predicted by the support vector machine classifier had significantly higher treatment improvement rates than nonresponders. These findings underscore the pivotal role of the right IFG and DLPFC in ameliorating pain intensity through CBT. Further accumulation of evidence is essential for future applications. PERSPECTIVE: We conducted MEG scans on 30 patients with chronic pain before and after a CBT program, comparing results with 31 healthy individuals. There were CBT-related changes in the right IFG and DLPFC. These results highlight the importance of specific brain regions in pain reduction through CBT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Atsuo Yoshino
- Health Service Center, Hiroshima University, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima, Japan; Center for Brain, Mind and KANSEI Sciences Research, Hiroshima University, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Toru Maekawa
- Center for Brain, Mind and KANSEI Sciences Research, Hiroshima University, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Miyuki Kato
- Department of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Hui-Ling Chan
- Center for Brain, Mind and KANSEI Sciences Research, Hiroshima University, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima, Japan; Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Institute of Medical Informatics, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City, Taiwan
| | - Naofumi Otsuru
- Department of Physical Therapy, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Kita-Ku, Niigata, Japan
| | - Shigeto Yamawaki
- Center for Brain, Mind and KANSEI Sciences Research, Hiroshima University, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Borchert RJ, Azevedo T, Badhwar A, Bernal J, Betts M, Bruffaerts R, Burkhart MC, Dewachter I, Gellersen HM, Low A, Lourida I, Machado L, Madan CR, Malpetti M, Mejia J, Michopoulou S, Muñoz-Neira C, Pepys J, Peres M, Phillips V, Ramanan S, Tamburin S, Tantiangco HM, Thakur L, Tomassini A, Vipin A, Tang E, Newby D, Ranson JM, Llewellyn DJ, Veldsman M, Rittman T. Artificial intelligence for diagnostic and prognostic neuroimaging in dementia: A systematic review. Alzheimers Dement 2023; 19:5885-5904. [PMID: 37563912 DOI: 10.1002/alz.13412] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2022] [Revised: 05/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/02/2023] [Indexed: 08/12/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Artificial intelligence (AI) and neuroimaging offer new opportunities for diagnosis and prognosis of dementia. METHODS We systematically reviewed studies reporting AI for neuroimaging in diagnosis and/or prognosis of cognitive neurodegenerative diseases. RESULTS A total of 255 studies were identified. Most studies relied on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative dataset. Algorithmic classifiers were the most commonly used AI method (48%) and discriminative models performed best for differentiating Alzheimer's disease from controls. The accuracy of algorithms varied with the patient cohort, imaging modalities, and stratifiers used. Few studies performed validation in an independent cohort. DISCUSSION The literature has several methodological limitations including lack of sufficient algorithm development descriptions and standard definitions. We make recommendations to improve model validation including addressing key clinical questions, providing sufficient description of AI methods and validating findings in independent datasets. Collaborative approaches between experts in AI and medicine will help achieve the promising potential of AI tools in practice. HIGHLIGHTS There has been a rapid expansion in the use of machine learning for diagnosis and prognosis in neurodegenerative disease Most studies (71%) relied on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset with no other individual dataset used more than five times There has been a recent rise in the use of more complex discriminative models (e.g., neural networks) that performed better than other classifiers for classification of AD vs healthy controls We make recommendations to address methodological considerations, addressing key clinical questions, and validation We also make recommendations for the field more broadly to standardize outcome measures, address gaps in the literature, and monitor sources of bias.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robin J Borchert
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Tiago Azevedo
- Department of Computer Science and Technology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - AmanPreet Badhwar
- Department of Pharmacology and Physiology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
- Centre de recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie (CRIUGM), Montreal, Canada
| | - Jose Bernal
- Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
- Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Matthew Betts
- Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany
- Center for Behavioral Brain Sciences, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Rose Bruffaerts
- Computational Neurology, Experimental Neurobiology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium
| | | | - Ilse Dewachter
- Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium
| | - Helena M Gellersen
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany
- Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Audrey Low
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Luiza Machado
- Department of Biochemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | | | - Maura Malpetti
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jhony Mejia
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Universidad de Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Sofia Michopoulou
- Imaging Physics, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Carlos Muñoz-Neira
- Research into Memory, Brain sciences and dementia Group (ReMemBr Group), Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Artificial Intelligence & Computational Neuroscience Group (AICN Group), Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), Department of Neuroscience, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jack Pepys
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Marion Peres
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Siddharth Ramanan
- Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Stefano Tamburin
- Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | | | - Lokendra Thakur
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Alessandro Tomassini
- Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Eugene Tang
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Danielle Newby
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - David J Llewellyn
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
- Alan Turing Institute, London, UK
| | - Michele Veldsman
- Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Timothy Rittman
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|