bioRxivNeurosciencePreprint
Connectome Principal Component Drives Cross-Dataset Replication and Clinical Prediction in Symptom Lesion Network Mapping
Sasin TreeratanaiD, Arp‐Arpa KasemsantithamiD, Setthanan JarukasemkitiD, Waragon PhusuwaniD, Anthipa ChokesuwattanaskuliD, Sira SriswasdiiD, Janine Diane BijsterboschiD, Chaipat ChunharasiD
Abstract
Lesion network mapping (LNM) describes a group of methods using normative functional connectivity data to map disparate brain lesions and stimulation sites onto common brain networks. Van den Heuvel and colleagues recently showed that these methods lack disease specificity, instead producing maps that converge toward intrinsic properties of the normative connectome dataset. Here, we investigate symptom LNM (sLNM), a recent advancement in the method which attempts to increase the robustness of results by incorporating symptom severity and incorporating replication across multiple datasets and prediction of clinical outcomes. Using clinical datasets of depression and Brocas aphasia, we show that sLNM maps from unrelated disorders nonetheless converge despite using null models which break the specific lesion-symptom structure in the datasets. Using simulated datasets with a known ground-truth disease network, we show that sLNM results are systematically biased towards the normative connectomes first principal component (PC1), which drives spurious convergence across unrelated datasets. We further show that the apparent clinical predictive capability of these maps are non-specific: network maps derived from unrelated disorders such as migraine and aphasia predict brain stimulation improvement in depression as well as -- or better than -- the cohorts own sLNM map. However, controlling for PC1 reduces spurious convergence across unrelated datasets and improves clinical prediction specificity, supporting the notion that disease-specific signal exists within sLNM but is confounded by the globally present PC1 signal in the normative connectome. These findings offer a practical correction applicable to existing and future sLNM studies.
- organism: human
- assay: spatial transcriptomics
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: clustering
- research focus: differential expression
- research focus: gene regulatory network inference
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 1
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Robust lesion network mapping reveals symptom-specific circuits
Weigang Cui, Jiayi Zhu, … Hesheng Liu·bioRxiv·May 19, 2026
- Spatial Bias in Lesion Network Mapping Is Connectome-Independent
Max Wawrzyniak, Tim Ritter, … Anika Stockert·bioRxiv·Mar 19, 2026
- Evaluating the value and limits of null-models for Lesion Network Mapping
Martijn P. van den Heuvel, Ilan Libedinsky, … Luca Cocchi·bioRxiv·Sep 29, 2026
- The diversity of lesion network mapping findings
Yao Meng, Wenqiang Xu, … Gong‐Jun Ji·bioRxiv·Feb 16, 2026
- The methodological foundations of lesion network mapping remain sound
Shan Siddiqi, Andreas Horn, … Michael Fox·bioRxiv·Feb 26, 2026
- Assessing specificity testing in Lesion Network Mapping
Martijn P. van den Heuvel, Ilan Libedinsky, … Luca Cocchi·bioRxiv·Sep 1, 2026