When radiology fails to fix clinical trial imaging workflow at sites…

What most think, why it’s wrong, and what cancer centers really need

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print

Radiology departments have tried for years to “own” or “fix” clinical trials imaging assessment workflows by extending clinical tools (PACS, worklists, dictation systems) and habits (speed, seamlessness, few clicks) into the research world. 

To access this subscriber-only content please log in or subscribe.

If your institution has a site license, log in with IP-login or register for a sponsored account.*
*Not all site licenses are enrolled in sponsored accounts.

Login Subscribe
Jeff Sorenson
CEO and co-founder, Yunu
Table of Contents

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

I have spent over 20 years running a tumor imaging metrics core at an academic cancer center. In that time, I have watched clinical trial enrollment concentrate at a relatively small number of flagship academic institutions. Unfortunately, trials do not propagate well to the community sites where most patients prefer to receive care. The explanations usually offered for why this happens have never fully accounted for what I observed.
In patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer, tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager, plus durvalumab as first-line maintenance therapy extended median overall survival by more than eight months, more than tripled progression-free survival, and reduced the risk of death by 58% compared to durvalumab alone, according to the results of the phase III open-label, multicenter, randomized DeLLphi-305 study. 
In patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer, tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager, plus durvalumab as first-line maintenance therapy extended median overall survival by more than eight months, more than tripled progression-free survival, and reduced the risk of death by 58% compared to durvalumab alone, according to results of the phase III open-label, multicenter, randomized DeLLphi-305 study.
Divarasib, a next-generation KRAS G12C inhibitor, lowered the risk of disease progression or death by 42% and the overall risk of death by 44% in people with previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated non-small cell lung cancer, according to the results from the phase III Krascendo 1 study. The therapy demonstrated the superior efficacy compared with current standard of care KRAS G12C inhibitors. 
Perioperative Imfinzi (durvalumab) plus neoadjuvant Padcev (enfortumab vedotin) reduced risk of recurrence by 49% and risk of death by 42% in muscle-invasive bladder cancer, according to the VOLGA phase III trial. The combination demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in the primary endpoint of event-free survival and key secondary endpoint of overall survival in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer versus standard of care. 
Jeff Sorenson
CEO and co-founder, Yunu

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login