Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Sep 25:9:784.
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00784. eCollection 2018.

Predicting Outcome of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Potential Value of Machine Learning Algorithms

Affiliations

Predicting Outcome of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Potential Value of Machine Learning Algorithms

Hendrikus J A van Os et al. Front Neurol. .

Abstract

Background: Endovascular treatment (EVT) is effective for stroke patients with a large vessel occlusion (LVO) of the anterior circulation. To further improve personalized stroke care, it is essential to accurately predict outcome after EVT. Machine learning might outperform classical prediction methods as it is capable of addressing complex interactions and non-linear relations between variables. Methods: We included patients from the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry, an observational cohort of LVO patients treated with EVT. We applied the following machine learning algorithms: Random Forests, Support Vector Machine, Neural Network, and Super Learner and compared their predictive value with classic logistic regression models using various variable selection methodologies. Outcome variables were good reperfusion (post-mTICI ≥ 2b) and functional independence (modified Rankin Scale ≤2) at 3 months using (1) only baseline variables and (2) baseline and treatment variables. Area under the ROC-curves (AUC) and difference of mean AUC between the models were assessed. Results: We included 1,383 EVT patients, with good reperfusion in 531 (38%) and functional independence in 525 (38%) patients. Machine learning and logistic regression models all performed poorly in predicting good reperfusion (range mean AUC: 0.53-0.57), and moderately in predicting 3-months functional independence (range mean AUC: 0.77-0.79) using only baseline variables. All models performed well in predicting 3-months functional independence using both baseline and treatment variables (range mean AUC: 0.88-0.91) with a negligible difference of mean AUC (0.01; 95%CI: 0.00-0.01) between best performing machine learning algorithm (Random Forests) and best performing logistic regression model (based on prior knowledge). Conclusion: In patients with LVO machine learning algorithms did not outperform logistic regression models in predicting reperfusion and 3-months functional independence after endovascular treatment. For all models at time of admission radiological outcome was more difficult to predict than clinical outcome.

Keywords: endovascular treatment; functional outcome; ischemic stroke; machine learning; prediction; reperfusion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic representation of nested cross-validation methodology.

References

    1. Goyal M, Menon BK, van Zwam WH, Dippel DW, Mitchell PJ, Demchuk AM, et al. . Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet (2016) 387:1723–31. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00163-X - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ferroni P, Zanzotto FM, Scarpato N, Riondino S, Nanni U, Roselli M, et al. . Risk assessment for venous thromboembolism in chemotherapy-treated ambulatory cancer patients: a machine learning approach. Med Decis Making (2016) 37:234–42. 10.1177/0272989X16662654 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Konerman MA, Zhang Y, Zhu J, Higgins PD, Lok AS, Waljee AK. Improvement of predictive models of risk of disease progression in chronic hepatitis c by incorporating longitudinal data. Hepatology (2015) 61:1832–41. 10.1002/hep.27750 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lambin P, van Stiphout RG, Starmans MH, Rios-Velazquez E, Nalbantov G, Aerts HJ, et al. . Predicting outcomes in radiation oncology–multifactorial decision support systems. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. (2013) 10:27–40. 10.1038/nrclinonc.2012.196 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mani S, Chen Y, Li X, Arlinghaus L, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson V, et al. . Machine learning for predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Am Med Inform Assoc. (2013) 20:688–95. 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001332 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources