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
Mint Medical showcases MSK-Prototype at IMR 2017 in Hamburg
Mint Medical was one of the sponsors of the first Intensive course Musculoskeletal Radiology (IMR) which took place on September 8th and 9th 2017 in…
A look ahead with mint Lesion 3.3
Mint Medical is pleased to announce the recent release of their software product version 3.3 of mint Lesion™ which was completed during recent weeks.…
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,…