Prediction of Clinical Outcome in Patients with Large-Vessel Acute Ischemic Stroke: Performance of Machine Learning versus SPAN-100

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Benjamin EJ,
   2. Muntner P,
   3. Alonso A, et al

   ; American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2019 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2019;139:e56–528 doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000659 pmid:30700139

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Albers GW,
   2. Marks MP,
   3. Kemp S, et al

   ; DEFUSE 3 Investigators. Thrombectomy for stroke at 6 to 16 hours with selection by perfusion imaging. N Engl J Med 2018;378:708–18 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1713973 pmid:29364767

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Nogueira RG,
   2. Jadhav AP,
   3. Haussen DC, et al

   ; DAWN Trial Investigators. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med 2018;378:11–21 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1706442 pmid:29129157

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Winzeck S,
   2. Hakim A,
   3. McKinley R, et al

   . ISLES 2016 and 2017-benchmarking ischemic stroke lesion outcome prediction based on multispectral MRI. Front Neurol 2018;9:679 doi:10.3389/fneur.2018.00679 pmid:30271370

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Turc G,
   2. Apoil M,
   3. Naggara O, et al

   . Magnetic resonance imaging-dragon score: 3-month outcome prediction after intravenous thrombolysis for anterior circulation stroke. Stroke 2013;44:1323–28 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000127 pmid:23482603

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Strbian D,
   2. Seiffge DJ,
   3. Breuer L, et al

   . Validation of the dragon score in 12 stroke centers in anterior and posterior circulation. Stroke 2013;44:2718–21 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002033 pmid:23929752

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Cooray C,
   2. Mazya M,
   3. Bottai M, et al

   . External validation of the astral and dragon scores for prediction of functional outcome in stroke. Stroke 2016;47:1493–99 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.012802 pmid:27174528

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Möbius C,
   2. Blinzler C,
   3. Schwab S, et al

   . Re-evaluation of the Stroke Prognostication Using Age and NIH Stroke Scale index (SPAN-100 index) in IVT patients: the-SPAN 100(65) index. BMC Neurol 2018;18:129 doi:10.1186/s12883-018-1126-0 pmid:30157792

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Saposnik G,
   2. Guzik AK,
   3. Reeves M, et al

   . Stroke prognostication using age and NIH Stroke Scale: SPAN-100. Neurology 2013;80:21–28 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827b1ace pmid:23175723

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    1. Rangaraju S,
    2. Aghaebrahim A,
    3. Streib C, et al

    . Pittsburgh Response to Endovascular Therapy (PRE) score: optimizing patient selection for endovascular therapy for large vessel occlusion strokes. J NeuroIntervent Surg 2015;7:783–88 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011351 pmid:25320054

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Flint AC,
    2. Faigeles BS,
    3. Cullen SP, et al

    ; VISTA Collaboration. Thrive score predicts ischemic stroke outcomes and thrombolytic hemorrhage risk in VISTA. Stroke 2013;44:3365–69 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002794 pmid:24072004

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Sarraj A,
    2. Albright K,
    3. Barreto AD, et al

    . Optimizing prediction scores for poor outcome after intra-arterial therapy in anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2013;44:3324–30 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001050 pmid:23929748

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Jiang B,
    2. Ball RL,
    3. Michel P, et al

    . Factors influencing infarct growth including collateral status assessed using computed tomography in acute patients with stroke with large artery occlusion. Int J Stroke 2019;14:603–12 doi:10.1177/1747493019851278 pmid:31096871

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Hakimelahi R,
    2. Vachha BA,
    3. Copen WA, et al

    . Time and diffusion lesion size in major anterior circulation ischemic strokes. Stroke 2014;45:2936–41 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.005644 pmid:25190444

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Bentley P,
    2. Ganesalingam J,
    3. Carlton Jones AL, et al

    . Prediction of stroke thrombolysis outcome using CT brain machine learning. Neuroimage Clin 2014;4:635–40 doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2014.02.003 pmid:24936414

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Asadi H,
    2. Dowling R,
    3. Yan B, et al

    . Machine learning for outcome prediction of acute ischemic stroke post intra-arterial therapy. PLoS One 2014;9:e88225 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088225 pmid:24520356

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Nishi H,
    2. Oishi N,
    3. Ishii A, et al

    . Predicting clinical outcomes of large vessel occlusion before mechanical thrombectomy using machine learning. Stroke 2019;50:2379–88 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025411 pmid:31409267

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Garg R,
    2. Oh E,
    3. Naidech A, et al

    . Automating ischemic stroke subtype classification using machine learning and natural language processing. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2019;28:2045–51 doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2019.02.004 pmid:31103549

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Yu Y,
    2. Guo D,
    3. Lou M, et al

    . Prediction of hemorrhagic transformation severity in acute stroke from source perfusion MRI. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2018;65:2058–65 doi:10.1109/TBME.2017.2783241 pmid:29989941

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Chung JW,
    2. Kim YC,
    3. Cha J, et al

    . Characterization of clot composition in acute cerebral infarct using machine learning techniques. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2019;6:739–47 doi:10.1002/acn3.751 pmid:31019998

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Adams HP Jr.,
    2. Bendixen BH,
    3. Kappelle LJ, et al

    . Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke: definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial—TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment. Stroke 1993;24:35–41 doi:10.1161/01.str.24.1.35 pmid:7678184

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Wintermark M,
    2. Flanders AE,
    3. Velthuis B, et al

    . Perfusion-CT assessment of infarct core and penumbra: receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in 130 patients suspected of acute hemispheric stroke. Stroke 2006;37:979–85 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000209238.61459.39 pmid:16514093

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    TIMI Study Group. The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trial: Phase I findings. N Engl J Med 1985;312:932–36 doi:10.1056/NEJM198504043121437 pmid:4038784

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Tan JC,
    2. Dillon WP,
    3. Liu S, et al

    . Systematic comparison of perfusion-CT and CT-angiography in acute patients with stroke. Ann Neurol 2007;61:533–43 doi:10.1002/ana.21130 pmid:17431875

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Puetz V,
    2. Dzialowski I,
    3. Hill MD, et al

    ; Calgary CTA Study Group. Intracranial thrombus extent predicts clinical outcome, final infarct size and hemorrhagic transformation in ischemic stroke: the clot burden score. Int J Stroke 2008;3:230–36 doi:10.1111/j.1747-4949.2008.00221.x pmid:18811738

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Freund Y

    . An adaptive version of the boost by majority algorithm. Machine Learning 2001;43:293–18. file:///C:/Users/mrudi/Downloads/Freund2001_Article_AnAdaptiveVersionOfTheBoostByM.pdf. Accessed January 18, 2019
27. 27.↵
    1. Chen T,
    2. Guestrin C

    . Xgboost: a scalable tree boosting system. In: KDD ‘16: Proceedings of the 22nd Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group for Knowledge Discovery from Data International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. San Francisco, California; August 2016:785–94
28. 28.↵
    1. Xie Y,
    2. Jiang B,
    3. Gong E, et al

    . Journal club: use of Gradient Boosting Machine learning to predict patient outcome in acute ischemic stroke on the basis of imaging, demographic, and clinical information. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019;212:44–51 doi:10.2214/AJR.18.20260 pmid:30354266

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Livne M,
    2. Boldsen JK,
    3. Mikkelsen IK, et al

    . Boosted tree model reforms multimodal magnetic resonance imaging infarct prediction in acute stroke. Stroke 2018;49:912–18 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.019440 pmid:29540608

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. DeLong ER,
    2. DeLong DM,
    3. Clarke-Pearson DL

    . Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operation characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837 doi:10.2307/2531595 pmid:3203132

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    1. Xavier Robin NT,
    2. Hainard A,
    3. Tiberti N, et al

    . Proc: An open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare roc curves. BMC Bioinformatics 2011;12:77 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-77

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    The R Core Team. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 1999–2012
33. 33.↵
    1. Bacchi S,
    2. Zerner T,
    3. Oakden-Rayner L, et al

    . Deep learning in the prediction of ischaemic stroke thrombolysis functional outcomes: a pilot study. Acad Radiology 2019;27:e19–23 doi:10.1016/j.acra.2019.03.015 pmid:31053480

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Heo J,
    2. Yoon JG,
    3. Park H, et al

    . Machine learning-based model for prediction of outcomes in acute stroke. Stroke 2019;50:1263–65 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.024293 pmid:30890116

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Torlay L,
    2. Perrone-Bertolotti M,
    3. Thomas E, et al

    . Machine learning-XGBoost analysis of language networks to classify patients with epilepsy. Brain Inform 2017;4:159–69 doi:10.1007/s40708-017-0065-7 pmid:28434153

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Adams HP Jr.,
    2. Davis PH,
    3. Leira EC, et al

    . Baseline NIH stroke scale score strongly predicts outcome after stroke: a report of the Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST). Neurology 1999;53:126–31 doi:10.1212/WNL.53.1.126

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
37. 37.↵
    1. Hankey GJ,
    2. Spiesser J,
    3. Hakimi Z, et al

    . Rate, degree, and predictors of recovery from disability following ischemic stroke. Neurology 2007;68:1583–87 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000260967.77422.97 pmid:17485645

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    1. Weir CJ,
    2. Murray GD,
    3. Dyker AG, et al

    . Is hyperglycaemia an independent predictor of poor outcome after acute stroke? Results of a long-term follow-up study. BMJ 1997;314:1303–06 doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7090.1303 pmid:9158464

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
39. 39.↵
    1. Parsons MW,
    2. Barber PA,
    3. Desmond PM, et al

    . Acute hyperglycemia adversely affects stroke outcome: a magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy study. Ann Neurol 2002;52:20–28 doi:10.1002/ana.10241 pmid:12112043

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
40. 40.↵
    1. Tan IY,
    2. Demchuk AM,
    3. Hopyan J, et al

    . CT angiography clot burden score and collateral score: correlation with clinical and radiologic outcomes in acute middle cerebral artery infarct. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:525–31 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1408 pmid:19147716

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
41. 41.↵
    1. Quinn TJ,
    2. Singh S,
    3. Lees KR, et al

    ; VISTA Collaborators. Validating and comparing stroke prognosis scales. Neurology 2017;89:997–1002 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000004332 pmid:28794250

    Abstract/FREE Full Text