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
Project „KoMed“: The cognitive medical assistant for risk and complication prevention
Funded by the Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts of Baden-Wuerttemberg, Mint Medical has been supporting the Heidelberg University Hospital as…
Structured reports for better patient care in oncology
“mint Lesion™ enables us to make better reports because it truly provides all the necessary data for patient care.” Dr. Laurent Chapuis shares how…
Quantitative Tumorbegleitung und ihre Einbettung in holistische Befundstrukturen (Only in German)
Wie können die Ergebnisse software-unterstützter Tumorbeurteilung gewinnbringend in die Routine-Kommunikation mit den klinischen Zuweisern und…