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
Brainlab and Mint Medical Enter Cooperation with the German Society for Orthopedics and Orthopedic Surgery
Today Mint Medical together with Brainlab entered into a cooperation with the German Society for Orthopedics and Orthopedic Surgery (DGOOC) and its…
Study confirms a vital need for structured radiology reporting
Free-text report often lacks both content and clarity, burdening referring physicians with the time-consuming and cumbersome task of finding and…
Advancing Childhood Cancer Research by Providing the Path to Structured, Mineable, AI-ready Data
Modern technology advancements, specifically in the area of medical imaging, have substantially improved the evaluation of therapy response and the…