Method for evaluating novel, stroke treatments using a tissue risk map
A method of evaluating novel stroke treatments includes generating a risk map indicative of the probability of tissue infarction on voxel-by-voxel basis and selecting a probability range for evaluating the therapeutic effect of the novel treatment. In one particular embodiment, tissue having a fifty percent probability of tissue infarction is selected. A novel treatment that has a reduced level of overall actual infarction as compared to the predicted value is indicative of therapeutic effect.
1. A method of evaluating a novel stroke treatment, comprising:
generating a risk map indicating voxel-by-voxel statistical probability of tissue infarction;
selecting a probability risk threshold for tissue infarction risk in the risk map;
evaluating the therapeutic effect of the novel stroke treatment by comparing the selected probability risk threshold and actual tissue infarction state on a voxel-by-voxel basis.
2. The method according to claim 1 , further including combining DWI and PWI data to generate the risk map.
3. The method according to claim 2 , wherein the DWI data is selected from one or more types selected from the group consisting of elements of the diffusion tensor such as ADC, low-b EPI T2 image, anisotropy indices, eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
4. The method according to claim 2 , wherein the PWI data is selected from one or more types selected from the group consisting of CBF, CBV, MTT and other parameters of the dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced images.
5. The method according to claim 2 , wherein the risk map is generated using a GLM algorithm combining EPI T2, ADC, DWI, CBF, CBV, and/or MTT data.
6. The method according to claim 1 , further including utilizing a GLM algorithm to generate the risk map.
7. The method according to claim 1 , further including utilizing a GAM algorithm to generate the risk map.
8. The method according to claim 1 , further including determining whether the novel treatment achieves a statically significant difference as compared to a conventional therapy.
9. The method according to claim 8 , further including determining whether the novel therapy is effective.
10. The method according to claim 1 , further including calculating true positive, true negative, false positive, and false negative values.
11. The method according to claim 1 , further including generating a plurality of risk maps, each of which corresponds to a particular therapy.
12. The method according to claim 11 , further including selecting one of the plurality of therapy based upon the plurality of risk maps.
13. The method according to claim 12 , further including selecting a therapy corresponding to a respective one of the plurality of risk maps having a smallest volume of tissue risk of infarction.
14. The method according to claim 12 , further including selecting a therapy corresponding to a respective one of the plurality of risk maps that minimizes a risk threshold of infarction.
15. The method according to claim 1 , further including selecting the risk threshold based upon which tissue is likely to infarct if a patient receives conventional therapy.
16. The method according to claim 1 , further including selecting the risk threshold based upon an optimal operating point for discriminating tissue likely to infarct front tissue not likely to infarct.
17. The method according to claim 1 , further including selecting the risk threshold of about thirty percent.
18. The method according to claim 1 , further including selecting the risk threshold based upon a risk level of tissue targeted by the novel treatment.