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
From images to data and with data to knowledge
Integrated diagnostics at LMU University Hospital Munich as the basis for personalized therapy management Heidelberg, GER – The long-standing…
How to improve reading procedures and reduce errors in clinical trials with imaging endpoints
Dr. Laura Oleaga from Hospital Clinìc de Barcelona explains how she and her team have benefitted from implementing mint Lesion™ in the face of an…
LMU University Hospital Munich: Real-time Data Visualization and Analysis in Clinical Ttrials with Imaging Endpoints
“mint Analytics expands your means of structured response assessment in mint Lesion™ by instantaneous visualization of the collected data, as a whole…