Epilepsy surgery is the treatment of choice for drug-resistant epilepsy patients, but up to 50% of patients continue to have seizures one year after the resection. In order to aid presurgical planning and predict postsurgical outcome on a patient-by-patient basis, we developed a framework of individualized computational models that combines epidemic spreading with patient-specific connectivity and epileptogeneity maps: the Epidemic Spreading Seizure and Epilepsy Surgery framework (ESSES). ESSES parameters were fitted in a retrospective study (N = 15) to reproduce invasive electroencephalography (iEEG)-recorded seizures. ESSES reproduced the iEEG-recorded seizures, and significantly better so for patients with good (seizure-free, SF) than bad (nonseizure-free, NSF) outcome. We illustrate here the clinical applicability of ESSES with a pseudo-prospective study (N = 34) with a blind setting (to the resection strategy and surgical outcome) that emulated presurgical conditions. By setting the model parameters in the retrospective study, ESSES could be applied also to patients without iEEG data. ESSES could predict the chances of good outcome after any resection by finding patient-specific model-based optimal resection strategies, which we found to be smaller for SF than NSF patients, suggesting an intrinsic difference in the network organization or presurgical evaluation results of NSF patients. The actual surgical plan overlapped more with the model-based optimal resection, and had a larger effect in decreasing modeled seizure propagation, for SF patients than for NSF patients. Overall, ESSES could correctly predict 75% of NSF and 80.8% of SF cases pseudo-prospectively. Our results show that individualised computational models may inform surgical planning by suggesting alternative resections and providing information on the likelihood of a good outcome after a proposed resection. This is the first time that such a model is validated with a fully independent cohort and without the need for iEEG recordings.

Epilepsy surgery is the treatment of choice for drug-resistant epilepsy patients, but only leads to seizure freedom for roughly two in three patients. To address this problem, we designed a patient-specific epilepsy surgery model combining large-scale magnetoencephalography (MEG) brain networks with an epidemic spreading model. This simple model was enough to reproduce the stereo-tactical electroencephalography (SEEG) seizure propagation patterns of all patients (N = 15), when considering the resection areas (RA) as the epidemic seed. Moreover, the goodness of fit of the model predicted surgical outcome. Once adapted for each patient, the model can generate alternative hypothesis of the seizure onset zone and test different resection strategies in silico. Overall, our findings indicate that spreading models based on patient-specific MEG connectivity can be used to predict surgical outcomes, with better fit results and greater reduction on seizure propagation linked to higher likelihood of seizure freedom after surgery. Finally, we introduced a population model that can be individualized by considering only the patient-specific MEG network, and showed that it not only conserves but improves the group classification. Thus, it may pave the way to generalize this framework to patients without SEEG recordings, reduce the risk of overfitting and improve the stability of the analyses.

Epilepsy surgery is the treatment of choice for drug-resistant epilepsy patients. However, seizure-freedom is currently achieved in only 2/3 of the patients after surgery. In this study we have developed an individualized computational model based on MEG brain networks to explore seizure propagation and the efficacy of different virtual resections. Eventually, the goal is to obtain individualized models to optimize resection strategy and outcome. We have modelled seizure propagation as an epidemic process using the susceptible-infected (SI) model on individual brain networks derived from presurgical MEG. We included 10 patients who had received epilepsy surgery and for whom the surgery outcome at least one year after surgery was known. The model parameters were tuned in in order to reproduce the patient-specific seizure propagation patterns as recorded with invasive EEG. We defined a personalized search algorithm that combined structural and dynamical information to find resections that maximally decreased seizure propagation for a given resection size. The optimal resection for each patient was defined as the smallest resection leading to at least a 90% reduction in seizure propagation. The individualized model reproduced the basic aspects of seizure propagation for 9 out of 10 patients when using the resection area as the origin of epidemic spreading, and for 10 out of 10 patients with an alternative definition of the seed region. We found that, for 7 patients, the optimal resection was smaller than the resection area, and for 4 patients we also found that a resection smaller than the resection area could lead to a 100% decrease in propagation. Moreover, for two cases these alternative resections included nodes outside the resection area. Epidemic spreading models fitted with patient specific data can capture the fundamental aspects of clinically observed seizure propagation, and can be used to test virtual resections in silico. Combined with optimization algorithms, smaller or alternative resection strategies, that are individually targeted for each patient, can be determined with the ultimate goal to improve surgery outcome. MEG-based networks can provide a good approximation of structural connectivity for computational models of seizure propagation, and facilitate their clinical use.

The success of epilepsy surgery in patients with refractory epilepsy depends upon correct identification of the epileptogenic zone (EZ) and an optimal choice of the resection area. In this study we developed individualized computational models based upon structural brain networks to explore the impact of different virtual resections on the propagation of seizures. The propagation of seizures was modelled as an epidemic process [susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) model] on individual structural networks derived from presurgical diffusion tensor imaging in 19 patients. The candidate connections for the virtual resection were all connections from the clinically hypothesized EZ, from which the seizures were modelled to start, to other brain areas. As a computationally feasible surrogate for the SIR model, we also removed the connections that maximally reduced the eigenvector centrality (EC) (large values indicate network hubs) of the hypothesized EZ, with a large reduction meaning a large effect. The optimal combination of connections to be removed for a maximal effect were found using simulated annealing. For comparison, the same number of connections were removed randomly, or based on measures that quantify the importance of a node or connection within the network. We found that 90% of the effect (defined as reduction of EC of the hypothesized EZ) could already be obtained by removing substantially less than 90% of the connections. Thus, a smaller, optimized, virtual resection achieved almost the same effect as the actual surgery yet at a considerably smaller cost, sparing on average 27.49% (standard deviation: 4.65%) of the connections. Furthermore, the maximally effective connections linked the hypothesized EZ to hubs. Finally, the optimized resection was equally or more effective than removal based on structural network characteristics both regarding reducing the EC of the hypothesized EZ and seizure spreading. The approach of using reduced EC as a surrogate for simulating seizure propagation can suggest more restrictive resection strategies, whilst obtaining an almost optimal effect on reducing seizure propagation, by taking into account the unique topology of individual structural brain networks of patients.

Clinical network neuroscience, the study of brain network topology in neurological and psychiatric diseases, has become a mainstay field within clinical neuroscience. Being a multidisciplinary group of clinical network neuroscience experts based in The Netherlands, we often discuss the current state of the art and possible avenues for future investigations. These discussions revolve around questions like “How do dynamic processes alter the underlying structural network?” and “Can we use network neuroscience for disease classification?” This opinion paper is an incomplete overview of these discussions and expands on ten questions that may potentially advance the field. By no means intended as a review of the current state of the field, it is instead meant as a conversation starter and source of inspiration to others.