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 benefits of structured oncologic reporting with mint Lesion™
Dr. Damiano Caruso of Sapienza Universita di Roma recounts how he got to know mint Lesion™ at a workshop hosted by the ESOI. Among other workstations,…
mint Lesion™ 3.8. Release: What’s New?
The recent 3.8 release brings with it a multitude of new features and refinements that further facilitate reporting, interdisciplinary collaboration,…
SLK Clinics Heilbronn: Oncological Therapy Assessment and Efficient, Structured Reports in Daily Routine
As a clinic group with almost 1500 beds, the SLK Clinics Heilbronn are the largest healthcare provider in the Heilbronn-Franconia region. The clinic…