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
New iRECIST Oncologic Response Criteria already in clinical use at the University Medical Center – Tübingen, Germany
Shortly following the release of the new iRECIST- oncologic response criteria (Lancet Oncology, March 2017) the University Medical Center in Tübingen,…
Mrs. Kelie Luby joins Mint Medical's team
Mrs. Kelie Luby will join Mint Medical’s team from January 2017 as new Vice President Clinical Trials Software and will be introduced at the upcoming…
Customized templates in mint Lesion 3.3
mint Lesion™ 3.3 features a novel data and knowledge modelling core that enables you to customize read procedures and reporting templates – or design…