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
The Template Designer in Use: Interview with Dr. Madelaine Hettler
Structured, well-organized data are the foundation of meaningful research. But how can they be captured effectively in practice? Dr. Madelaine…
Research Insights from Dr. Madelaine Hettler: The Template Designer in Use
Structured and well-organized data are essential building blocks for successful research and clinical projects. The Template Designer provides a tool…
Structured Reporting in Radiology: Precision, Clarity, and Data Quality
Radiology reports are often the key to a diagnosis – and the way they are created and communicated makes a crucial difference. Traditional free-text…