A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross-sectional and longitudinal associations with age
Authors: Nerland Stener , Stokkan Therese S. , Jørgensen Kjetil N. , Wortinger Laura A. , Richard Geneviève , Beck Dani , van der Meer Dennis , Westlye Lars T. , Andreassen Ole A. , Agartz Ingrid , Barth Claudia 
Published: March 2022

AbstractIntracranial volume (ICV) is frequently used in volumetric brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, both as an adjustment factor for head size and as a variable of interest. Associations with age have been reported in both longitudinal and cross-sectional studies, but results have varied, potentially due to differences in ICV estimation methods. Here, we compared five commonly used ICV estimation methods and their cross-sectional and longitudinal associations with age. T1-weighted cross-sectional MRI data was included for 651 healthy individuals recruited through the NORMENT Centre (mean age = 46.1 years, range = 12.0-85.8 years) and 2,410 healthy individuals recruited through the UK Biobank study (UKB, mean age = 63.2 years, range = 47.0-80.3 years), where follow-up data was also available with a mean follow-up interval of 2.3 years. ICV was estimated with FreeSurfer (eTIV and sbTIV), SPM12, CAT12, and FSL. We assessed Pearson correlations, performed Bland-Altman analysis, and tested the explained variance of sex, height, body weight, and age on pairwise differences between ICV estimation methods. We fitted regression models to test linear and non-linear cross-sectional associations between age and ICV. For the UKB dataset, we further assessed longitudinal ICV change using linear mixed-effects (LME) models. We found overall high correlations across ICV estimation method, with the lowest correlations between FSL and eTIV (r=0.87) and between FSL and CAT12 (r=0.89). Widespread proportional bias was found in the Bland-Altman analyses, i.e., agreement between methods varying as a function of head size. Body weight, age, and sex explained the most variance in the differences between ICV estimation methods, indicating possible confounding by these variables for some estimation methods. In the NORMENT dataset, cross-sectional associations with age were found only for FSL and SPM12, indicating a positive association. For the UKB dataset, we observed negative cross-sectional associations with age for all ICV estimation methods. Longitudinal associations with age were found for all ICV estimation methods, with estimated annual percentage change ranging from −0.291 % to −0.416 % across the sampled age range. This convergence of longitudinal results across ICV estimation methods, in the largest dataset to date, offers strong evidence for age-related ICV reductions in mid- to late adulthood.HighlightsCorrelations between the five assessed estimation methods were very high (r>0.90) with the exception of FSL and eTIV (r=0.87), and FSL and CAT12 (r=0.89).Explained variance of estimated ICV differences by body weight, age, and sex indicate possible confounding for some ICV estimation methods.Positive cross-sectional associations with age, from adolescence to old age, were observed for the SPM12 and FSL estimation methods in one dataset.In the other dataset, negative cross-sectional associations with age, from mid- to late adulthood, were found for all estimation methods.Longitudinal ICV changes were observed for all estimation methods, indicating an annual percentage ICV reduction of −0.29 % to −0.42 % in mid- to late adulthood.