Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Alzheimer’s disease is a firmly incurable and progressive disease. The pathology of Alzheimer’s disease usually evolves from cognitive normal, to mild cognitive impairment, to Alzheimer’s disease. The aim of this paper is to develop a Bayesian hidden Markov model to characterize disease pathology, identify hidden states corresponding to the diagnosed stages of cognitive decline, and examine the dynamic changes of potential risk factors associated with the cognitive normal–mild cognitive impairment–Alzheimer’s disease transition. The hidden Markov model framework consists of two major components. The first one is a state-dependent semiparametric regression for delineating the complex associations between clinical outcomes of interest and a set of prognostic biomarkers across neurodegenerative states. The second one is a parametric transition model, while accounting for potential covariate effects on the cross-state transition. The inter-individual and inter-process differences are taken into account via correlated random effects in both components. Based on the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative data set, we are able to identify four states of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, corresponding to common diagnosed cognitive decline stages, including cognitive normal, early mild cognitive impairment, late mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease and examine the effects of hippocampus, age, gender, and APOE- $ε 4$ on degeneration of cognitive function across the four cognitive states.

Keywords

Bayesian P-splines correlated random effects hidden Markov models MCMC methods semiparametric models

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albert

DeKosky

Dickson

et al.

The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimers disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimers Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011; 7: 270–279.

Cappé

Moulines

Rydén

. Inference in hidden Markov models, New York: Springer, 2005.

Maruotti

. Mixed hidden Markov models for longitudinal data: an overview. Int Stat Rev 2011; 79: 427–454.

Bartolucci

Farcomeni

Pennoni

. Latent Markov models for longitudinal data, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC, Taylor and Francis Group, 2013.

Vermunt

Langeheine

Böckenholt

. Latent Markov models with time-constant and time-varying covariates. J Educ Behav Stat 1999; 24: 178–205.

Scott

James

Sugar

. Hidden Markov models for longitudinal comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc 2005; 100: 359–369.

Schmittmann

Dolan

van der Maas

et al.

Discrete latent Markov models for normally distributed response data. Multivariate Behav Res 2005; 40: 461–488.

Bartolucci

Farcomeni

. A multivariate extension of the dynamic logit model for longitudinal data based on a latent Markov heterogeneity structure. J Am Stat Assoc 2009; 104: 816–831.

Chow

Grimm

Filteau

et al.

Regime-switching bivariate dual change score model. Multivariate Behav Res 2013; 48: 463–502.

10.

Albert

McFarland

Smith

et al.

Time series for modelling counts from a relapsingremitting disease: application to modelling disease activity in multiple sclerosis. Stat Med 1994; 13: 453–466.

11.

Altman

Petkau

. Application of hidden Markov models to multiple sclerosis lesion count data. Stat Med 2005; 24: 2335–2344.

12.

Altman

. Mixed hidden Markov models. J Am Stat Assoc 2007; 102: 201–210.

13.

Zhang

Rejeski

et al.

Partially ordered mixed hidden Markov model for the disablement process of older adults. J Am Stat Assoc 2013; 108: 370–384.

14.

Song

Xia

Zhu

. Hidden Markov latent variable models with multivariate longitudinal data. Biometrics 2017; 73: 313–323.

15.

Yau

Papaspiliopoulos

Roberts

et al.

Bayesian nonparametric hidden Markov models with application to the analysis of copy-number-variation in mammalian genomes. J R Stat Soc Ser B 2011; 73: 37–57.

16.

Wulfsohn

Tsiatis

. A joint model for survival and longitudinal data measured with error. Biometrics 1997; 53: 330–339.

17.

Chi

Ibrahim

. Regime-switching bivariate dual change score model. Biometrics 2006; 62: 432–445.

18.

Scott

. Bayesian methods for hidden Markov models: recursive computing in the 21st century. J Am Stat Assoc 2002; 97: 337–351.

19.

Johnson

Willsky

. Bayesian nonparametric hidden semi-Markov Models. J Mach Learn Res 2013; 14: 673–701.

20.

Agresti

. Categorical data analysis, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002.

21.

Panagiotelis

Smith

. Bayesian identification, selection and estimation of semiparametric functions in high-dimensional additive models. J Econom 2008; 143: 291–316.

22.

Song

. Semiparametric latent variable models with Bayesian P-splines. J Comput Graph Stat 2010; 19: 590–608.

23.

Congdon

. Bayesian models for categorical data, Chichester: Wiley, 2005.

24.

Hedeker

Gibbons

. Longitudinal data analysis, New Jersey: Wiley, 2006.

25.

Song

Lee

. Model comparison of generalized linear mixed models. Stat Med 2006; 25: 1685–1698.

26.

Frühwirth-Schnatter

. Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation of classical and dynamic switching and mixture models. J Am Stat Assoc 2001; 96: 194–209.

27.

Berry

Carroll

Ruppert

. Bayesian smoothing and regression splines for measurement error problems. J Am Stat Assoc 2002; 97: 160–169.

28.

Lang

Brezger

. Bayesian P-splines. J Comput Graph Stat 2004; 13: 183–212.

29.

Fahrmeir

Raach

. A Bayesian semiparametric latent variable model for mixed responses. Psychometrika 2007; 72: 327–346.

30.

De Boor

. A practical guide to splines, Rev. ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001.

31.

Eilers

PHC

Marx

. Flexible smoothing with B-splines and penalties. Stat Sci 1996; 11: 89–121.

32.

Metropolis

Rosenbluth

et al.

Equations of state calculations by fast computing machine. J Chem Phys 1953; 21: 1087–1091.

33.

Hastings

. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 1970; 57: 97–109.

34.

Celeux

Forbes

Robert

et al.

Deviance information criteria for missing data models. Bayesian Anal 2006; 1: 651–674.

35.

Spiegelhalter

Best

Carlin

et al.

Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit (with discussion). J R Stat Soc Ser B 2002; 64: 583–639.

36.

Okuizumi

Onodera

Tanaka

et al.

ApoE-ɛ4 and early onset Alzheimer’s. Nat Genet 1994; 7: 10–11.

37.

Kesslak

Nalcioglu

Cotman

. Quantification of magnetic resonance scans for hippocampal and parahippocampal atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1991; 41: 51–54.

38.

Jack

Petersen

O’Brien

et al.

MR-based hippocampal volumetry in the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1992; 42: 183–188.

39.

Dickerson

Wolk

. Biomarker-based prediction of progression in MCI: comparison of AD-signature and hippocampal volume with spinal fluid amyloid-β and tau. Front Aging Neurosci 2013; 5: 55–55.

40.

Kantarci

Gunter

Tosakulwong

et al.

Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Focal hemosiderin deposits and

{\hat{I}}^{2}

-amyloid load in the ADNI cohort. Alzheimers Dement 2013; 9: S116–S123.

41.

Gao

Hendrie

Hall

et al.

The relationships between age, sex, and the incidence of dementia and Alzheimer disease: a meta-analysis. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 809–815.

42.

Lindsay

Laurin

Verreault

et al.

Risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease: a prospective analysis from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. Am J Epidemiol 2002; 156: 445–453.

43.

Lee

Zhu

Kong

et al.

BFLCRM: a Bayesian functional linear Cox regression model for predicting time to conversion to Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Appl Stat 2015; 9: 2153–2178.

44.

Petersen

. Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity. J Intern Med 2004; 256: 183–194.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.13 MB

Bayesian hidden Markov models for delineating the pathology of Alzheimer’s disease

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material