Treatment Efficacy Analysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Using In Silico Modeling Based on Machine Learning: A Proof-of-Principle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interventional neuroradiology is characterized by engineering- and experience-driven device development with design improvements every few months. However, clinical validation of these new devices requires lengthy and expensive randomized controlled trials. This contribution proposes a machine learning-based in silico study design to evaluate new devices more quickly with a small sample size. Acute diffusion- and perfusion-weighted MRI, segmented one-week follow-up imaging, and clinical variables were available for 90 acute ischemic stroke patients. Three treatment option-specific random forest models were trained to predict the one-week follow-up lesion segmentation for (1) patients successfully recanalized using intra-arterial mechanical thrombectomy, (2) patients successfully recanalized using intravenous thrombolysis, and (3) non-recanalizing patients as an analogue for conservative treatment for each patient in the sample, independent of the true group membership. A repeated-measures analysis of the three predicted follow-up lesions for each patient revealed significantly larger lesions for the non-recanalizing group compared to the successful intravenous thrombolysis treatment group, which in turn showed significantly larger lesions compared to the successful mechanical thrombectomy treatment group (p < 0.001). A groupwise comparison of the true follow-up lesions for the three treatment options showed the same trend but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.19). We conclude that the proposed machine learning-based in silico trial design leads to clinically feasible results and can support new efficacy studies by providing additional power and potential early intermediate results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".