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
Launch of the Bavarian Oncology Radiology Network (BORN) Project
Improving the diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients by harnessing the potential of digitalization and standardization is the ultimate ambition of…
Scientifically proven benefits of mint Lesion™ in clinical routine
In contrast to clinical trials, unstructured free-text reporting is still common in the clinical routine. Such reports often lack content and clarity,…
RACOON - What's Next?
Since mid-2020, mint Lesion™ has been successfully used within the Radiological Cooperative Network (RACOON), in the University Medicine Network which…