A recent retrospective study led by Dr. Marilyn J. Siegel and her team at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis has shed light on a critical issue in cancer care: routine clinical reads are more prone to overdiagnosing progressive disease when compared to RECIST 1.1 interpretations. This discrepancy holds significant implications, potentially leading to the premature discontinuation of effective treatments for cancer clinical trial participants and patients under standard care.
In this study, mint Lesion software was utilized for the criteria-based reads, determining overall response assessments according to RECIST 1.1 criteria, and generating structured reports for the clinical trial's principal investigator.
To learn more about the study's insights into the discrepant assessments and the suggested steps for mitigating this issue, click here.
Study Discovers Overdiagnosis of Progressive Cancer in Routine Clinical Evaluations
Related Resources
Related Resources
Structured Reporting and AI in Radiology: Efficiency and Quality in Prostate Diagnostics
How are structured reporting and artificial intelligence transforming radiology practice? Prof. Dr. Thorsten Persigehl from University Hospital…
Rare Tumors, Big Goals: How RACOON-SAGA Aims to Improve Therapy Decisions
Rare tumors, major challenges: The RACOON-SAGA project explores how imaging and clinical data can improve the pre-therapeutic characterization of soft…
Structured Reporting and Artificial Intelligence in Prostate Diagnostics: An Interview with Prof. Dr. Thorsten Persigehl
What does radiology look like when structured reporting meets artificial intelligence? A look into the daily practice of Prof. Dr. Thorsten Persigehl…