Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 78, Issue 10, pp 12883–12915 | Cite as

An efficient classification approach for detection of Alzheimer’s disease from biomedical imaging modalities

  • D. BaskarEmail author
  • V. S. Jayanthi
  • A. N. Jayanthi


The complex patterns of the neuroimaging data are analyzed successfully with bio-medical imaging applications. The patients with/without AD can be discriminated effectively through several biomedical imaging modalities such as, sMRI, fMRI, PET and so on. In this paper, brain images from structural MRI (sMRI) are used for better categorization of 3 subjects namely, NC (Normal Control), MCI (Mild Cognitive Impairment) and AD (Alzheimer’s disease). Moreover, ambiguous training data employed for the discrimination of subjects may mislead the classifier to take incorrect decisions and in turn degrades the classification performance. In order to recover these hurdles, we propose an automated reliable system for the detection of AD affected patients accurately from the brain images of sMRI. The proposed system is a multi-stage system comprising four key phases namely, i) pre-processing, ii) feature extraction, iii) feature selection and iv) detection phase. In the initial phase, ROI regions related to Hippocampus (HC) and Posterior Cingulate Cortex (PCC) from the brain images are extracted using Automated Anatomical Labeling (AAL) method. In the feature extraction stage, important texture and shape features are extracted from HC and PCC involved in three brain planes. Nearly, 19 highly relevant AD related features are selected through a multiple-criterion feature selection method. It should be noted that, the class labels when explored manually consumes more time and turns to be an expensive process. Therefore, it is essential to construct an automatic method to identify irrelevant samples in the training data to enhance the decision-making process. With this in mind, at the detection phase, a novel classification technique is proposed by combining the Kernel fuzzy c-means clustering (i.e. unsupervised learning technique) and Back-propagation artificial neural network (i.e. supervised learning technique) to categorize NC, MCI and AD from the brain images of sMRI. This proposed KFCM based BPANN algorithm can improve the classification performance by removing the suspicious training samples. The proposed frameworks efficiency is evaluated with the ADNI subset and then to the Bordeaux-3 city dataset. The experimental validation of our proposed approach attains an accuracy of 97.63%, 95.4%, 96.4% for the most challenging classification tasks AD vs NC, MCI vs NC and AD vs MCI, respectively.


Biomedical imaging Structural MRI KFCM BPANN Hippocampus Posterior cingulate cortex AAL 



  1. 1.
    Ahmed MM, Mohamad DB (2004) Segmentation of brain MR images for tumor extraction by combining k means clustering and Perona-Malik anisotropic diffusion model. Int J Image Process 2(1):27–34Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmed OB, Mizotin M, Benois-Pineau J, Allard M, Catheline G, Amar CB, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (2015) Alzheimer's disease diagnosis on structural MR images using circular harmonic functions descriptors on hippocampus and posterior cingulate cortex. Comput Med Imaging Graph 44:13–25Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akgül CB, Ünay D, Ekin A (2009) Automated diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease usingimage similarity and user feedback. In: Proceedings of the ACM internationalconference on image and video retrieval. New York: ACM, p 1–8Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aksu Y, Miller DJ, Kesidis G, Bigler DC, Yang QX (2011) An MRI-derived definition of MCI-to-AD conversion for long-term, automatic prognosis of MCI patients. PLoS One. 6.
  5. 5.
    Amadasun M, King R (1989) Texture features corresponding to textural properties. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 19(5):1264–1274Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arbabshirani MR, Plis S, Sui J, Calhoun VD (2017) Single subject prediction of brain disorders in neuroimaging: promises and pitfalls. NeuroImage 145:137–165Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ashburner J, Friston KJ (2000) Voxel-based morphometry – the methods. NeuroImage 11:805–821Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Beheshti I, Demirel H (2015) Probability distribution function-based classification of structural MRI for the detection of Alzheimer's disease. Comput Biol Med 64:208–216Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bezdek JC (1981) Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Plenum Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cabral C, Morgado PM, Campos Costa D, Silveira M (2015) Predicting conversion from MCI to AD with FDG-PET brain images at different prodromal stages. Comput Biol Med 58:101–109Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Challis E, Hurley P, Serra L, Bozzali M, Oliver S (2015) Cercignani, “Gaussian process classification of Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment from resting-state fMRI”. Neuroimage 112:232–243Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chandrashekar G, Sahin F A survey on feature selection methods. Comput Electr Eng 40(1):16–28Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen G, Ward BD, Xie C, Li W, Wu Z, Jones JL, Franczak M, Antuono P, Li SJ (2011) Classification of Alzheimer disease, mild cognitive impairment, and normal cognitive status with large-scale network analysis based on resting-state functional MR imaging. Radiology 259:213–221Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cheng B, Liu M, Zhang D, Munsell BC (2015) Domain transfer learning for MCI conversion prediction. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 62:1805–1817Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chételat G, Desgranges B, Landeau B, Mzenge F, Poline JB, de la Sayette V et al (2008) Direct voxel-based comparison between grey matter hypometabolismand atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease. Brain 131:60–71Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cho Y, Seong J, Jeong Y, Yong S (2012) Individual subject classification for Alzheimer’s disease based on incremental learning using a spatial frequency representation of cortical thickness data. NeuroImage 59:2217–2230Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Christos D, Yong F, Xiaoying W, Dinggang S, Susan MR (2008) Detection of prodromal Alzheimer’s disease via pattern classification of magnetic resonance imaging. Neurobiol Aging 29:514–523Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chu A, Sehgal CM, Greenleaf JF (1990) Use of gray value distribution of run lengths for texture analysis. Pattern Recogn Lett 11(6):415–420zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cocosco CA, Zijdenbos AP, Evans AC (2003) A fully automatic and robust brain MRI tissue classification method. Med Image Anal 7(4):513–527Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cuingnet R, Gerardin E, Tessieras J, Auzias G, Lehéricy S, Habert MO et al (2011) Automatic classification of patients with Alzheimer’s disease from structural MRI: a comparison of ten methods using the ADNI database. NeuroImage 56:766–781Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dasarathy BV, Holder EB (1991) (1991). Image characterizations based on joint gray level run length distributions. Pattern Recogn Lett 12(8):497–502Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dyer CR, Rosenfeld A (1976) Fourier texture features: suppression of aperture effects. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 10:703–705Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    El-Dahshan ESA, Hosny T, Salem ABM (2010) Hybrid intelligent techniques for MRI brain images classification. Digital Signal Process 2:433–441. Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    El-Sayed A, El-Dahshan A, Salem M, Younis TH (2009) A hybrid technique for automatic MRI brain images classification, Vol. LIV, Studia Univ, Babes Bolyai, of InformaticaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Falahati F, Westman E, Simmons A (2014) Multivariate data analysis and machine learning in Alzheimer's disease with a focus on structural magnetic resonance imaging. J Alzheimers Dis 41:685–708Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fiot J-B, Raguet H, Risser L, Cohen LD, Fripp J, Vialard F-X, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (2014) Longitudinal deformation models, spatial regularizations and learning strategies to quantify Alzheimer's disease progression. NeuroImage: Clinical 4:718–729Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fransson P (2005) Spontaneous low-frequency BOLD signal fluctuations: an fMRI investigation of the resting-state default mode of brain function hypothesis. Hum Brain Mapp 26:15–29Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Frisoni GB, Testa C, Sabattoli F, Beltramello A, Soininen H, Laakso MP (2005) Structuralcorrelates of early and late onset Alzheimers disease: voxel based morphomet-ric study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 76:112–114Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Galloway MM (1975) Texture analysis using gray level run lengths. Computer Graphics and Image Processing 4(2):172–179Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Giraldo DL, García-Arteaga JD, Cárdenas-Robledo S, Romero E (2018) Characterization of brain anatomical patterns by comparing region intensity distributions: applications to the description of Alzheimer's disease. Brain Behav 8(4):e00942Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (2010) Digital image processing using MATLAB, 2nd edn. Pearson Prentice Hall (Chapter 11)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gutman B, Morra YWJ, Toga A, Thompson P (2009) Disease classification with hip-pocampal shape invariants. Hippocampus 19:572–578Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hagan MT, Demuth HB, Beale M (1996) Neural network design. Cengage learning (India ed.) (Chapter 11 & 12)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Haralick RM, Shanmugan K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-3:610–621Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-3(6):610–621Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Herrera LJ, Rojas I, Pomares H, Guillén A, Valenzuela O, Baños O (2013) Classification of MRI Images for Alzheimer's Disease Detection. In: Social Computing (SocialCom), 2013 International Conference on, p 846–851. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hu MK (1962) Visual pattern recognition by moment invariants. IRE Trans Inf Theory 8(2):179–187zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ishii K, Kawachi T, Sasaki H, Kono AK, Fukuda T, Kojima Y, Mori E (2005) Voxel-based morphometric comparison between early- and late-onset mild Alzheimer's disease and assessment of diagnostic performance of z score images. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 26:333–340Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jain M, Dua P, Lukiw WJ (2013) Data adaptive rule-based classification system for Alzheimer classification. J Comput Sci Syst Biol 6:291–297Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jie B, Zhang D, Gao W, Wang Q, Wee CY, Shen D (2014) Integration of network topological and connectivity properties for neuroimaging classification. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 61:576–589Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jolliffe IT (2002) Principal component analysis, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jones BF, Barnes J, Uylings HBM, Fox NC, Frost C, Witter MP et al (2006) Differentialregional atrophy of the cingulate gyrus in Alzheimer disease: a volumetric MRIstudy. Cereb Cortex 16:1701–1708Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Khazaee A, Ebrahimzadeh A, Babajani-Feremi (2015) Identifying patients with Alzheimer's disease using resting-state fMRI and graph theory. Clin Neurophysiol 126:2132–2141Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kim YS, Street WN, Menczer F (2016) In: Feature selection in data mining Accessed 28 Jan 16
  45. 45.
    Lan X, Ma AJ, Yuen PC (2014) Multi-cue visual tracking using robust feature-level fusion based on joint sparse representation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, p 1194–1201Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lan X, Ma AJ, Yuen PC, Chellappa R (2015) Joint sparse representation and robust feature-level fusion for multi-cue visual tracking. IEEE Trans Image Process 24(12):5826–5841MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lan X, Zhang S, Yuen PC (2016) Robust joint discriminative feature learning for visual tracking. In: IJCAI, p 3403–3410Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lan X, Yuen PC, Chellappa R (2017) Robust MIL-based feature template learning for object tracking. In: AAAI, p 4118-4125Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lan X, Zhang S, Yuen PC, Chellappa R (2018) Learning common and feature-specific patterns: a novel multiple-sparse-representation-based tracker. IEEE Trans Image Process 27(4):2022–2037MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Laws KI (1980) Rapid texture identification. In: Proc. SPIE 0238, image processing for missile guidance, p 376–380Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Li B, Chen W, Wang D (2008) An improved FCM algorithm incorporating spatial information for image segmentation. International Symposium on Computer Science and Computational Technology, ISCSCT 2:493–495Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Liu F, Zhou L, Shen C, Yin J (2014) Multiple kernel learning in the primal for multimodal Alzheimer's disease classification. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 18:984–990Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Magnin B, Mesrob L, Kinkingnhun S, Plgrini-Issac M, Colliot OSM, Dubois B et al (2009) Support vector machines-based classification of Alzheimer disease from wholebrain anatomical MRI. Neuroradiology 51:73–83Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    McGowan JC (2008) Basic principles of magnetic resonance imaging. Elsevier 18(4):623–636Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nir TM, Villalon-Reina JE, Prasad G, Jahanshad N, Joshi SH, Toga AW, Bernstein MA, Jack CR Jr, Weiner MW, Thompson PM (2015) Diffusion weighted imaging-based maximum density path analysis and classification of Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiol Aging 36:S132–S140Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Pan Y, Huang W, Lin Z, Zhu W, Zhou J, Wong J, Ding Z (2015) Brain tumor grading based on neural networks and convolutional neural networks. Eng Med Biol Soc (EMBC), 2015 37th Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE, p 699–702.
  57. 57.
    Pievani M, de Haan W, Wu T, Seeley WW, Frisoni GB (2011) Functional network disruption in the degenerative dementias. Lancet Neurol 10:829–843Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ridha BH, Barnes J, Van de Pol LA, Schott JM, Boyes RG, Siddique MM et al (2007) Application of automated medial temporal lobe atrophy scale to Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol 64:849–854Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rusinek H, De Santi S, Frid D, Tsui WH, Tarshish CY, Convit A et al (2003) Regional brain atrophy rate predicts future cognitive decline: 6-year longitudinal MR imaging study of normal aging. Radiology 229(3):691–696Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sabuncu MR, Konukoglu E (2015) Clinical prediction from structural brain MRI NeuroImage scans: a large-scale empirical study. Neuroinformatics 13:31–46Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Saha S, Bandyopadhyay S (2007) MRI brain image segmentation by fuzzy sym-metry based genetic clustering technique. Evol Comput:4417–4424.
  62. 62.
    Salvatore C, Cerasa A, Battista P, Gilardi MC, Quattrone A, Castiglioni I (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: a machine learning approach. Front Neurosci 9:307Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sarraf S, Tofighi G (2016) Deep AD: Alzheimer’s disease classification via deep convolutional neural networks using MRI and fMRI. bioRxiv : 070441Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Serrano-Pozo A, Frosch MP, Masliah E, Hyman BT (2011) Neuropathological alterations in Alzheimer disease. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 1:a006189Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Shen K, Bourgeat P, Fripp J, Meriaudeau F, Salvado O (2012) Detecting hippocampalshape changes in Alzheimer’s disease using statistical shape models. NeuroImage 59:2155–2166Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Srinivasan GN, Shobha G (2008) Statistical texture analysis. In: Proceedings of world academy of science, engineering and technology, p 1264–1269Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Stoitsis J, Golemati S, Nikita KS (2006) A modular software system to assist interpretation of medical images - application to vascular ultrasound images. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 55(6):1944–1952Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sujatha K, Shalini Punithavathani D (2018) Optimized ensemble decision-based multi-focus imagefusion using binary genetic Grey-Wolf optimizer in camera sensor networks. Multimed Tools Appl 77(2):1735–1759Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Tang J, Alelyani S, Liu H (2014) Feature selection for classification: a review. In: Data classification: algorithms and applications. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Termenon M, Graña M (2012) A two stage sequential ensemble applied to the classification of Alzheimer's disease based on mri features. Neural Process Lett 35:1–12Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Toga AW, Thompson PM, Mega MS, Narr KL, Blanton RE (2001) Probabilistic approaches for atlasing normal and disease-specific brain variability. Anat Embryol 24:267–282Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Tzourio-Mazoyer N, Landeau B, Papathanassiou D, Crivello F, Etard O, Del-croix N et al (2002) Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using amacroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain. NeuroImage 15:273–289Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Vinu Sundararaj (2016) An efficient threshold prediction scheme for wavelet based ECG signal noise reduction using variable step size firefly algorithm. Int J Intell Eng Syst 9(3):117–126Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Weishaupt D, Kochli VD, Marinek B (2003) How does MRI work? An introduction to the physics and functions of magnetic resonance imaging, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Weszka JS, Dyer CR, Rosenfeld A (1976) A comparative study of texture measures for terrain classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-6(4):269–285zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Wu CM, Chen YC (1992) Statistical feature matrix for texture analysis. CVGIP: Graphical Models and Image Processing 54(5):407–419Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Wu CM, Chen YC, Hsieh KS (1992) Texture features for classification of ultrasonic liver images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 11(2):141–152Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Zhang Y, Dong Z, Wu L, Wang S (2011) A hybrid method for MRI brain image classification. Expert Syst Appl 38:10049–10053. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hindusthan College of Engineering and TechnologyCoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.Rajagiri School of Engineering and TechnologyCochinIndia
  3. 3.Sri Ramakrishna Institute of TechnologyCoimbatoreIndia

Personalised recommendations