Macroscopically, there was no tract volume difference between patients and controls and there was no difference between the volume of the ventricles. The percentage differences between patients and controls for the FA and T1 measurements were small across the individual tracts, and most of these differences were not significant. The effect size for mean differences averaged across all the tracts was −0.18 for FA, 0.41 for MD, and 0.20 for T1. We subsequently analyzed the tract profiles for MD because it showed the greatest effect size in tract mean differences.
Tract profiles for the optic radiation, VOF, and occipital corpus callosum were compared between patients and controls.
Figure 2 displays a visualization of the optic radiation and the VOF and their tract profile comparisons. The likelihood ratio tests between the full model with mixed effects and the null model revealed significant main effects of group for several tracts. The patients' MD along the left optic radiation was significantly higher than that of the controls (
χ2 = 1,
P = 0.03). Their mean diffusivity for the right optic radiation was marginally higher than that of the controls (
χ2 = 1,
P = 0.07). Post hoc tests on dimension-reduced data revealed the approximate locations of abnormality. There were marginally significant group differences at locations close to LGN in both tracts (
P = 0.05, 0.07, respectively). The tract profile of the right VOF showed significantly higher values in patients (
χ2 = 1,
P = 0.02) , with a major part of the tract showing a main effect of group (three out of four locations,
P = 0.04, 0.02, 0.03
, respectively) . These locations are indicated by filled red circles in
Figure 2. There was no difference between patients and controls in the left VOF or in the occipital callosum (see
Supplementary Fig. S1 for a visualization of the occipital callosum).
From the visualizations of the VOF and the optic radiation in
Figure 2, it is sometimes difficult to tell if parts of the two tracts are overlapping (i.e., pass through the same voxels).
Figure 3 displays the results of the distance analysis for these tracts. The dotted line indicates the possible affected portions in each tract, and the box with a thick border highlights the distance between the affected portions of the two tracts. The color scale plots the Euclidean distance within these affected regions. In regions where the internode distance is small, it is not possible to uniquely assign the effect to one tract or the other. By contrast, when the distance is large (∼15 mm) the tracts are sufficiently separated to independently interpret the effect. In
Figure 3 left there are effects in the left optic radiation (dashed lines), but no effect in the left VOF. The effect observed in left optic radiation is therefore not due to the effects in the left VOF. In
Figure 3 right, both tracts have effects, but the distance between affected portions of the two tracts is more than 20 mms and there are thus independent effects in both tracts.
Turning now to the whole-brain tract analysis,
Table 2 provides a ranking of all of the measured fibers by their effect sizes on the MD tract mean measure. The most affected tract in terms of effect size was the anterior frontal corpus callosum (ACC:
d = 0.74).
Figure 4 shows the tract profiles for the ACC and another top-ranking tract, the left inferior longitudinal fasciculus (ILF). The anterior frontal corpus callosum connects the homologous regions of the anterior frontal lobe in each hemisphere. The inferior longitudinal fasciculus connects the temporal lobe and occipital lobe. Post hoc tests revealed several locations of significant group differences (
P < 0.05), which are indicated by red circles in
Figure 4. Beyond these tracts, there is a graded continuum of effect sizes in the remainder of the tracts analyzed.
As the ILF also lies in the occipital lobe and passes near the optic radiation and the VOF, we performed our distance analysis as above in order to determine if the effects observed in one tract are independent of effects in the other tracts.
Figure 5 displays the results of the distance analysis for these tracts. In the left ILF, there are two regions of the tract that show significant effects. Neither of these effects can be accounted for by the left VOF (
Fig. 5A) as there are no effects in the left VOF. When considering the relationship of the left ILF to the left optic radiation, there is a single region where the two tracts are too close together to suggest independent effects (upper left box), but there are three other regions that are sufficiently separate to indicate independent effects. In the right occipital lobe, the distance in the potential overlap region between the VOF and the ILF is large but this same region is highly overlapped with the optic radiation. Together with our previous distance analysis, we can conclude the effect in the right VOF is independent of the other two tracts but the effects in the right optic radiation is contaminated with the effects in the right ILF.