Diagnostics & imaging AI · Radiology workflow platform
New Lantern
New Lantern is a cloud radiology platform that combines the worklist, PACS viewer, and Curie AI reporting assistant, which pre-drafts reports for the radiologist to review and sign.
Strong fit
- Independent radiology groups that want worklist, image viewer, and AI report drafting in one cloud system
- Practices replacing an aging PACS that is reaching end of life
- Groups adding sites quickly that do not want to add back-office staff at the same pace
Weak fit
- Hospitals that want AI to detect disease on images
- Large health systems that need a long record of enterprise PACS installations
- Buyers who need a published price list
Bottom line
New Lantern is a San Francisco company that combines a radiology worklist, a cloud image viewer, and AI that drafts the report in one browser-based system. Its Curie assistant pre-drafts much of each report in the radiologist's own style, and the radiologist reviews and signs it. Practices choose it when they want to replace separate PACS, reporting, and worklist tools with one platform.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Shiva Suri, an engineer at the data company Confluent, started New Lantern after the pandemic put him in the same home office as his mother, a radiologist. He told TechCrunch she spent seven to eight hours a day on workflow tasks and only about 5 percent of her time thinking about the images. New Lantern puts the worklist, the PACS viewer, and AI reporting into one cloud system with a single login. Its Curie assistant takes measurements, compares prior studies, and pre-drafts up to 75 percent of the report in each radiologist's language, and the radiologist edits and signs it. The company is registered with the FDA as a Class I image communications device and says Curie does not detect or diagnose disease.
Benchmark led a $19 million Series A in November 2024, and partner Eric Vishria joined the board. Customers include Central Illinois Radiological Associates, a physician-owned group founded in 1938 whose more than 93 radiologists read for more than 26 hospitals and clinics, along with Radiology Associates of Corpus Christi and Naugatuck Valley Radiology. New Lantern says Southern Radiology Ventures grew from 10 to 20 sites and doubled its exam volume in under a year on the platform.
Compare Sirona Medical when a larger practice wants a unified cloud platform with an FDA-cleared advanced imaging suite, Rad AI when a group wants to keep its PACS and add AI to its reporting, and RADPAIR when radiologists want to try AI reporting on their own with a free trial.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Rad AI | 7.7 | 7.2 |
| Sirona Medical | 7.5 | 6.9 |
| New Lantern | 7.2 | 7.2 |
| RADPAIR | 6.9 | 7.5 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Subscription quoted by New Lantern for radiology practices, covering the worklist, cloud viewer, and Curie AI reporting. |
| What usually drives cost | Study volume, number of radiologists and sites, image storage and migration from the old PACS, and integrations with hospital systems. |
| What to ask in diligence | Price per study or per radiologist, the cost of migrating old images, and storage fees as volume grows. |
| Published pricing | No public list price. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get New Lantern to function | |
| Practice owner for the switch | Changing PACS touches every radiologist. |
| Image migration plan | Old studies must be available for comparison. |
| Hospital interface list | Orders and reports have to flow to each client hospital. |
| Radiologist champions | Early users shape how Curie drafts reports. |
| Security review | Images move to the cloud. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Start with one site and its busiest radiologists | Curie learns from each radiologist's edits. |
| Track reports per hour before and after | Shows whether the time savings are real. |
| Retire the old PACS on a fixed date | Running two systems slows everyone. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| No migration plan | |
| Wants diagnostic AI | |
| Hospitals will not connect | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Contract and integration planning | 4-8 weeks |
| 2 | First site live | 1-3 months |
| 3 | All sites moved | 3-9 months |
Leadership
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.