Biological sex classification with structural MRI data shows increased misclassification in transgender women

Authors: Claas Flint, Katharina Förster, Sophie A. Koser, Carsten Konrad, Pienie Zwitserlood, Klaus Berger, Marco Hermesdorf, Tilo Kircher, Igor Nenadic, Axel Krug, Bernhard T. Baune, Katharina Dohm, Ronny Redlich, Nils Opel, Volker Arolt, Tim Hahn, Xiaoyi Jiang, Udo Dannlowski, Dominik Grotegerd

Neuropsychopharmacology 45 (2020) 1758-1765
arXiv: 1911.10617v2 - DOI (q-bio.NC)
Content adapted to the publication at Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract: Transgender individuals (TIs) show brain structural alterations that differ from their biological sex as well as their perceived gender. To substantiate evidence that the brain structure of TIs differs from male and female, we use a combined multivariate and univariate approach. Gray matter segments resulting from voxel-based morphometry preprocessing of $N = 1753$ cisgender (CG) healthy participants were used to train ($N=1402$) and validate (20 % hold-out; $N = 351$) a support-vector machine classifying the biological sex. As a second validation, we classified $N = 1104$ patients with depression. A third validation was performed using the matched CG sample of the transgender women (TWs) application-sample. Subsequently, the classifier was applied to $N = 26$ TWs. Finally, we compared brain volumes of CG-men, women and TW-pre/post treatment (cross-sex hormone treatment) in a univariate analysis controlling for sexual orientation, age and total brain volume. The application of our biological sex classifier to the transgender sample resulted in a significantly lower true positive rate (TPR) (TPR-male = 56.0 %). The TPR did not differ between CG-individuals with (TPR-male = 86.9 %) and without depression (TPR-male = 88.5 %). The univariate analysis of the transgender application-sample revealed that TW-pre/post treatment show brain structural differences from CG-women and CG-men in the putamen and insula, as well as the whole-brain analysis. Our results support the hypothesis that brain structure in TW differs from brain structure of their biological sex (male) as well as their perceived gender (female). This finding substantiates evidence that TIs show specific brain structural alterations leading to a different pattern of brain structure than CG-individuals.

Submitted to arXiv on 24 Nov. 2019

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 1911.10617v2

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

The summary is not ready yet
Created on 16 May. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.