Thanks for your valuable reply. Well I can understand your doubts of radiological studies. It is not always happen that clinical signs correlate with the radiological studies. But I think that at present best availbale data is from Wikipedia reference-linkMRI from which we can assess the pathological improvement in the soft tissue recovery. And in other words what will be the other reliable criteria of assessing the response to treatment as we all know the signs of clinical recovery some times also don't correspond to the radiological data. In general in clinical studies usually there is strict criteria used with great competence of the all medical professionals involved making the chance of error to minimum. Looking forward to hear more useful comments from you.