Cited by 12Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Integrative Bayesian analysis of neuroimaging-genetic data with application to cocaine dependence

Open access
Azadeh, Shabnam, Hobbs, Brian P., Ma, Liangsuo, Nielsen, David A., Gerard Moeller, F., Baladandayuthapani, Veerabhadran·2016·NeuroImage

Abstract

Neuroimaging and genetic studies provide distinct and complementary information about the structural and biological aspects of a disease. Integrating the two sources of data facilitates the investigation of the links between genetic variability and brain mechanisms among different individuals for various medical disorders. This article presents a general statistical framework for integrative Bayesian analysis of neuroimaging-genetic (iBANG) data, which is motivated by a neuroimaging-genetic study in cocaine dependence. Statistical inference necessitated the integration of spatially dependent voxel-level measurements with various patient-level genetic and demographic characteristics under an appropriate probability model to account for the multiple inherent sources of variation. Our framework uses Bayesian model averaging to integrate genetic information into the analysis of voxel-wise neuroimaging data, accounting for spatial correlations in the voxels. Using multiplicity controls based on the false discovery rate, we delineate voxels associated with genetic and demographic features that may impact diffusion as measured by fractional anisotropy (FA) obtained from DTI images. We demonstrate the benefits of accounting for model uncertainties in both model fit and prediction. Our results suggest that cocaine consumption is associated with FA reduction in most white matter regions of interest in the brain. Additionally, gene polymorphisms associated with GABAergic, serotonergic and dopaminergic neurotransmitters and receptors were associated with FA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.033

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Andersson JL Jenkinson M Smith S 2007b Non-linear registration, aka Spatial normalisation FMRIB technical report TR07JA2 FMRIB Analysis Group of the University of Oxford
  2. Müller P Quintana F Rosner G 2004 Hierarchical meta-analysis over related non-parametric Bayesian models Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B 66 735 749

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Azadeh, S., Hobbs, B. P., Ma, L., Nielsen, D. A., Gerard Moeller, F., & Baladandayuthapani, V.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Baladandayuthapani, Veerabhadran
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
125
Pages
813-824
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2134357550
Cited by
12
References
91
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NIDA (R25T)
  • NIH (P30 CA016672, R01 CA160736)
  • NSF DMS (1463233)
  • NIH/NIDA (DA018197)
  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (DA026120)
  • Toomim Family Fund
  • National Institutes of Health (R25DA026120, P50DA009262)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
cocaine dependence, Bayesian model averaging, false discovery rate, fractional anisotropy, diffusion tensor imaging, white matter, genetic polymorphism, GABA receptors, serotonergic receptors, dopamine receptors, model uncertainty
MeSH terms
Adult, Bayes Theorem, Brain, Computer Simulation, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Male, Middle Aged, Anisotropy, Cocaine-Related Disorders, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Young Adult, Diffusion Tensor Imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review