Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Voxel-based lesion–symptom mapping

Abstract

For more than a century, lesion–symptom mapping studies have yielded valuable insights into the relationships between brain and behavior, but newer imaging techniques have surpassed lesion analysis in examining functional networks. Here we used a new method—voxel-based lesion–symptom mapping (VLSM)—to analyze the relationship between tissue damage and behavior on a voxel-by-voxel basis, as in functional neuroimaging. We applied VLSM to measures of speech fluency and language comprehension in 101 left-hemisphere-damaged aphasic patients: the VLSM maps for these measures confirm the anticipated contrast between anterior and posterior areas, and they also indicate that interacting regions facilitate fluency and auditory comprehension, in agreement with findings from modern brain imaging.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Representative slices from VLSM maps computed for fluency and auditory comprehension performance of 101 aphasic stroke patients.
Figure 2: Representative slices from maps of voxel-by-voxel ANCOVAs covarying out particular anatomically defined voxels of interest.

References

  1. 1

    Adolphs, R., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., Cooper, G. & Damasio, A.R. J. Neurosci. 20, 2683–2690 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Dronkers, N.F. Nature 384, 159–161 (1996).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Naeser, M.A. & Hayward, R.W. Neurology 28, 545–551 (1978).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Friedrich, F.J., Egly, R., Rafal, R.D. & Beck, D. Neuropsychology 12, 193–207 (1998).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Chao, L.L. & Knight, R.T. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 10, 167–177 (1998).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Kertesz, A. Aphasia and Associated Disorders: Taxonomy, Localization and Recovery (Grune & Stratton, New York, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Petersen, S.E., Fox, P.T., Posner, M.I., Mintun, M. & Raichle, M.E. Nature 331, 585–589 (1988).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Price, C.J. J. Anat. 197, 335–359 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Maguire, E.A. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 4398–4403 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Metter, E.J. et al. Arch. Neurol. 47, 1235–1238 (1990).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Knight, R.T., Scabini, D., Woods, D.L. & Clayworth, C. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 70, 499–509 (1988).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Dronkers, N.F., Wilkins, D.P., Van Valin, R.D. Jr., Redfern, B.B. & Jaeger, J.J. Cognition (in press).

  13. 13

    Wise, R. et al. Brain 114, 1803–1817 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Blank, S.C., Scott, S.K., Murphy, K., Warburton, E. & Wise, R.J.S. Brain 125, 1829–1838 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Wise, R.J.S., Greene, J., Büchel, C. & Scott, S.K. Lancet 353, 1057–1061 (1999).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank D.P. Wilkins and C. Ludy for comments, suggestions and assistance. This work was funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Research, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (PO1 NS17778, NINDS 21135, PO1 NS40813) and the National Institute of Deafness and Communication Disorders (NIH/NIDCD 2 R01 DC00216).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nina F. Dronkers.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Fig. 1.

Methods for comparing VLSM maps. (a) A scatterplot of the correlation between fluency and comprehension t-scores, with voxels treated as subjects (r = 0.59). (b) Differences between the t-statistics for each of the tasks. The color codes are common across both panels, showing differences between t-scores. Red, voxels more important for fluency; blue, voxels more important for comprehension; green, voxels that were roughly equally relevant for both tasks. Faded colors denote lack of relevance to either measure. (JPG 55 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bates, E., Wilson, S., Saygin, A. et al. Voxel-based lesion–symptom mapping. Nat Neurosci 6, 448–450 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1050

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing