Latent Representation Learning from 3D Brain MRI for Latent Analysis and Prediction in Multiple Sclerosis
Authors: Trinh Ngoc Huynh, Nguyen Duc Kien, Nguyen Hai Anh, Dinh Tran Hiep, Manuela Vaneckova, Tomas Uher, Jeroen Van Schependom, Stijn Denissen, Tran Quoc Long, Nguyen Linh Trung, Guy Nagels
Organizations: VNU University of Engineering and Technology, Hanoi, Vietnam. · Bach Mai Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam. · Department of Radiology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. · Department of Neurology and Center of Clinical Neuroscience, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. · AIMS Lab, Center for Neurosciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium. · Department of Electronics and Informatics (ETRO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Neurological diseases can cause significant cognitive impairment, yet linking brain structure to cognitive function remains challenging due to the limitations of conventional methods and the black-box nature of deep learning. We propose InfoVAE-Med3D, an adaptation of InfoVAE for three-dimensional brain MRI that learns informative latent representations by relaxing the mutual information regularization penalty between inputs and latent representations. We evaluated the method on a healthy control (HC) dataset (n=6,503) with age and sex information and a multiple sclerosis (MS) dataset (n=916) with age, sex, and Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) scores. Two-dimensional visualizations revealed sex-related clustering and smooth transitions in grey and white matter volumes. Removing the mutual information regularization penalty generally improved MRI reconstruction and brain age and SDMT prediction using support vector regression, outperforming other variational autoencoder variants and achieving competitive performance with deep learning predictors, particularly on the MS dataset. InfoVAE-Med3D provides informative latent representations for investigating brain-related characteristics and supports latent-space analysis and imaging biomarker discovery for cognitive impairment, particularly in MS.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of the proposed pipeline using InfoVAE-Med3D for latent representation learning, followed by latent-space analysis and cognitive biomarker prediction.
Dataset
HC dataset
MS dataset
Subjects / Sessions
6,503 / 6,503
916 / 2,408
Train / Val / Test
5,202 / 650 / 651
1,929 / 241 / 238
Age
Range
18–97
19–74
Mean ± SD
43.70±21.41
42.19±9.52
SDMT
Range
–
16–97
Mean ± SD
–
58.94±12.02
Table 1: Summary statistics of the HC and MS datasets.
Figure 2: Effect of latent dimensionality on MRI reconstruction quality.
Models
HC dataset
MS dataset
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
LPIPS ↓
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
LPIPS ↓
Baseline models
AE
0.8065
24.99
0.1395
0.7370
24.73
0.1609
VAE
0.6269
20.38
0.2329
0.5825
20.45
0.2500
BetaVAE
0.6642
21.39
0.2156
0.6097
21.75
0.2362
Our proposed model: InfoVAE-Med3D
Table 2: Reconstruction results for different configurations of the proposed model compared with baseline VAE variants. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Figure 3: Qualitative reconstruction comparison of InfoVAE-Med3D and VAE baselines on two cases from the HC (in the left, blue background) and MS (in the right, yellow background) datasets.
Figure 4: Two-dimensional projections of latent representations colored by sex labels for the HC and MS datasets. PCA and PLS Regression projections are shown on the left and right, respectively.
Figure 5: Latent representations colored by estimated GM volumes for the HC and MS datasets. PCA and PLS Regression projections are shown on the left and right, respectively.
Figure 6: Latent representations colored by estimated WM volumes for the HC and MS datasets. PCA and PLS Regression projections are shown on the left and right, respectively.
Models
HC dataset
MS dataset
Brain age
Brain age
SDMT
RF
8.192 ± 0.304
6.145 ± 0.368
8.821 ± 0.384
LR
6.715 ± 0.351
6.314 ± 0.386
10.648 ± 0.486
KNN
8.829 ± 0.336
7.313 ± 0.535
9.713 ± 0.491
XGBoost
7.234 ± 0.345
5.929 ± 0.420
8.853 ± 0.441
Adaboost
7.707 ± 0.261
6.055 ± 0.439
8.877 ± 0.459
Table 3: Results of cognitive biomarker prediction using different ML models on the HC and MS datasets, reported as MAE (Mean ± SD) over 5-fold cross-validation on the combined training and validation sets. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Models
HC dataset
MS dataset
Brain age
Brain age
SDMT
MAE ↓
R2↑
RMSE ↓
MAE ↓
R2↑
RMSE ↓
MAE ↓
R2↑
RMSE ↓
Average
10.39
0.000
11.98
7.153
0.000
9.129
9.650
-2.274
11.96
DL models
ResNet
6.484
0.541
8.221
5.691
0.406
7.112
9.132
0.095
11.42
DenseNet
6.063
0.574
7.901
5.544
0.413
6.978
9.023
0.108
11.35
Table 4: Quantitative results of cognitive biomarker prediction on the HC and MS datasets, comparing latent representations learned by our proposed model, representation-learning baselines, and DL models. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University School of Medicine · Department of Mathematical Modelling, Statistics & Bioinformatics, Ghent University · Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University
Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK · Sheikh Zayed Institute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation, Children’s National Hospital, Washington, DC USA · School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA