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 Mint Experience of Dr. Stephen Raskin, Sheba Medical Center in Tel Aviv
From my initial experience with mint Lesion™ software, and over the time I have been using it, I have been pleased with the software and come to…
How mint Lesion 3.5 helps you to benefit from Artificial Intelligence in Radiology
According to researchers, every adult makes 35,000 decisions each day. While there are no numbers in literature about how many decisions a radiologist…
AI-powered quantification of bone metastasis in prostate cancer
Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer among men, and there are now effective treatments for the disease. New therapies available on the…