A risk scoring system for the differentiation between melanoma with regression and regressing nevi

A European Multicentric Investigation of Atypical Melanocytic Skin Lesions of Palms and Soles: The iDScore-PalmoPlantar Database

Background: The differential diagnosis of atypical melanocytic palmoplantar skin lesions (aMPLs) represents a diagnostic challenge, including atypical nevi (AN) and early melanomas (MMs) that display overlapping clinical and dermoscopic features. We aimed to set up a multicentric dataset of aMPL dermoscopic cases paired with multiple anamnestic risk factors and demographic and morphologic data. Methods: Each aMPL case was paired with a dermoscopic and clinical picture and a series of lesion-related data (maximum diameter value; location on the palm/sole in 17 areas; histologic diagnosis; and patient-related data (age, sex, family history of melanoma/sunburns, phototype, pheomelanin, eye/hair color, multiple/dysplastic body nevi, and traumatism on palms/soles). Results: A total of 542 aMPL cases-113 MM and 429 AN-were collected from 195 males and 347 females. No sex prevalence was found for melanomas, while women were found to have relatively more nevi. Melanomas were prevalent on the heel, plantar arch, and fingers in patients aged 65.3 on average, with an average diameter of 17 mm. Atypical nevi were prevalent on the plantar arch and palmar area of patients aged 41.33 on average, with an average diameter of 7 mm. Conclusions: Keeping in mind the risk profile of an aMPL patient can help obtain a timely differentiation between malignant/benign cases, thus avoiding delayed and inappropriate excision, respectively, with the latter often causing discomfort/dysfunctional scarring, especially at acral sites.

A risk-scoring model for the differential diagnosis of lentigo maligna and other atypical pigmented facial lesions of the face: The facial iDScore

BACKGROUND

Due to progressive ageing of the population, the incidence of facial lentigo maligna (LM) of the face is increasing. Many benign simulators of LM and LMM, known as atypical pigmented facial lesions (aPFLs-pigmented actinic keratosis, solar lentigo, seborrheic keratosis, seborrheic-lichenoid keratosis, atypical nevus) may be found on photodamaged skin. This generates many diagnostic issues and increases the number of biopsies, with a subsequent impact on aesthetic outcome and health insurance costs.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to develop a risk-scoring classifier-based algorithm to estimate the probability of an aPFL being malignant. A second aim was to compare its diagnostic accuracy with that of dermoscopists so as to define the advantages of using the model in patient management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 154 dermatologists analysed 1111 aPFLs and their management in a teledermatology setting: They performed pattern analysis, gave an intuitive clinical diagnosis and proposed lesion management options (follow-up/reflectance confocal microscopy/biopsy). Each case was composed of a dermoscopic and/or clinical picture plus metadata (histology, age, sex, location, diameter). The risk-scoring classifier was developed and tested on this dataset and then validated on 86 additional aPFLs.

RESULTS

The facial Integrated Dermoscopic Score (iDScore) model consisted of seven dermoscopic variables and three objective parameters (diameter ≥ 8 mm, age ≥ 70 years, male sex); the score ranged from 0 to 16. In the testing set, the facial iDScore-aided diagnosis was more accurate (AUC = 0.79 [IC 95% 0.757-0.843]) than the intuitive diagnosis proposed by dermatologists (average of 43.5%). In the management study, the score model reduced the number of benign lesions sent for biopsies by 41.5% and increased the number of LM/LMM cases sent for reflectance confocal microscopy or biopsy instead of follow-up by 66%.

CONCLUSIONS

The facial iDScore can be proposed as a feasible tool for managing patients with aPFLs.

Development and Implementation of a Web-Based International Registry Dedicated to Atypical Pigmented Skin Lesions of the Face: Teledermatologic Investigation on Epidemiology and Risk Factors

Background: Atypical pigmented facial lesions (aPFLs) often display clinical and dermoscopic equivocal and/or overlapping features, thus causing a challenging and delayed diagnosis and/or inappropriate excisions. No specific registry dedicated to aPFL paired with clinical data is available to date. Methods: The dataset is hosted on a specifically designed web platform. Each complete case was composed of the following data: (1) one dermoscopic picture; (2) one clinical picture; (3) two lesion data, that is, maximum diameter and facial location (e.g., orbital area/forehead/nose/cheek/chin/mouth); (4) patient's demographics: family history of melanoma, history of sunburns in childhood, phototype, pheomelanine, eyes/hair color, multiple nevi/dysplastic nevi on the body; and (5) acquisition device (videodermatoscope/camera-based/smartphone-based system). Results: A total of 11 dermatologic centers contributed to a final teledermoscopy database of 1,197 aPFL with a distribution of 353 lentigo maligna (LM), 146 lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM), 231 pigmented actinic keratoses, 266 solar lentigo, 125 atypical nevi, 48 seborrheic keratosis, and 28 seborrheic-lichenoid keratoses. The cheek site was involved in half of aPFL cases (50%). Compared with those with the other aPFL cases, patients with LM/LMM were predominantly men, older (69.32 ± 12.9 years on average vs. 62.69 ± 14.51), exhibited larger lesions (11.88 ± 7.74 mm average maximum diameter vs. 9.33 ± 6.46 mm), and reported a positive history of sunburn in childhood. Conclusions: The iDScore facial dataset currently represents a precious source of data suitable for the design of diagnostic support tools based on risk scoring classifiers to help dermatologists in recognizing LM/LMM among challenging aPFL in clinical practice.

Frequency of Publication of Dermoscopic Images in Inter-observer Studies: A Systematic Review

Research interest in dermoscopy is increasing, but the complete dermoscopic image sets used in inter-observer studies of skin tumours are not often shared in research publications. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse what proportion of images depicting skin tumours are published in studies investigating inter-observer variations in the assessment of dermoscopic features and/or patterns. Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus databases were screened for eligible studies published from inception to 2 July 2020. For included studies the proportion of lesion images presented in the papers and/or supplements was extracted. A total of 61 studies (53 original studies and 8 shorter reports (i.e. research letters or concise reports)). published in the period 1997 to 2020 were included. These studies combined included 14,124 skin tumours, of which 373 (3%) images were published. This systematic review highlights that the vast majority of images included in dermoscopy research are not published. Data sharing should be a requirement for future studies, and must be enabled and standardized by the dermatology research community and editorial offices.

Trends in Incidence and Mortality of Skin Melanoma in Lithuania 1991-2015

Background. We aimed to investigate age-specific and sex-specific incidence trends of melanoma in Lithuania from 1991 to 2015. Methods. Analysis was based on data from the population-based Lithuanian Cancer Registry database for 1991–2015, and 6024 cases of skin melanoma were identified. Age-adjusted rates (ASRs) by sex and age group were calculated. Adjustment for ASRs was done using the old European standard population, where a total of three age groups were considered: 0–39, 40–59 and 60+. Additionally, the annual percent change (APC) was calculated, and 95% confidence intervals for APC were calculated. Results. Between 1991 and 2015, the overall melanoma rates increased by an annual percent change (APC) of 3.9% in men (95% CI, 3.6–4.1%) and 2.3% in women (95% CI, 2.1–2.5%). The highest incidences of new cutaneous melanoma cases were observed between old adults (60+) of both sexes, while the lowest incidence rates were observed in the young adult group (up to 39 years old), with the lowest APC (1.6% in males and 0.4% in females). The overall number of melanoma deaths during 1991 and 2015 increased from 64 to 103 deaths per year, and the age-standardized rate (ASR) increased 1.3 times (from 1.8 to 2.4). Conclusions. The incidence and mortality of skin melanoma seem to be increased in all age groups. These trends indicate that skin protection behavior is not sufficient in our population and more efforts need to be taken in order to decrease incidence and mortality rates.

Dermoscopy of early melanomas: variation according to the anatomic site

To date, is yet to be elucidated whether the body location of cutaneous melanoma can significantly affect an early dermoscopic diagnosis and, consequently, if it can be regarded as a prognostic factor. To investigate the dermoscopic appearance of early melanomas (EMs) at different body sites; to test the ability of dermoscopists in recognizing specific dermoscopic features in EMs. A pool of 106 experienced dermoscopists evaluated the presence of 10 dermoscopic features assumed as suggestive of malignancy among 268 images of EMs with ambiguous appearance located at 16 body sites. According to 720 evaluations, EMs of the "upper extremities" showed a prevalence of early atypical lentiginous features. EMs of the "anterior trunk" exhibited the lower rate of recognition for all features. EMs of the "rear trunk" can be regarded as an intermediate area, showing high recognition rates of regression-related and chronic-traumatism-related features.

The impact of anatomical location and sun exposure on the dermoscopic recognition of atypical nevi and early melanomas: usefulness of an integrated clinical-dermoscopic method (iDScore)

BACKGROUND

The anatomical location of atypical melanocytic skin lesion (aMSL) was never combined into an algorithm for discriminating early melanomas (EM) from atypical nevi (AN).

AIMS

To investigate the impact of body location on the intuitive diagnosis performed in teledermoscopy by dermatologists of different skill levels. A further aim was to evaluate how the integration of the body location could improve an algorithm-aided diagnosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected 980 standardized dermoscopic images of aMSL cases (663 AN, 317 EM): data on the anatomical location were collected according to 15 body sites classified into 4 macro-areas of chronically/frequently/seldom/rarely exposure. Through a teledermatology web platform, 111 variously skilled dermoscopists performed either the intuitive diagnosis and 3 algorithm-assisted diagnostic tests (i.e. iDScore, 7-point checklist, ABCD rule) on each case, for a total of 3330 examinations.

RESULTS

In the rarely photoexposed area (side, bottom, abdomen), AN were the most tricky (i.e. highest quote of false positives), due to a frequent recognition of dermoscopic features usually considered as suggestive for melanoma in these lesions; the EM at these sites received the highest quote of false negatives, being generally interpreted as 'featureless' according to these traditional parameters, that were more frequently displayed on the chronically photoexposed area. In rarely and seldom photoexposed area, intuitive diagnosis fails to achieve adequate accuracy for all aMSLs, as the ABCD rule and the 7-point checklist; by applying the iDScore algorithm the diagnostic performance was increased by 15% in young and 17% in experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The body location of an aMSL can affect the quality of intuitive dermoscopic diagnosis, especially in sun-protected areas. Accuracy can be improved by using the iDScore algorithm that assigns a different partial score of each body site.

Diagnostic Performance of a Support Vector Machine for Dermatofluoroscopic Melanoma Recognition: The Results of the Retrospective Clinical Study on 214 Pigmented Skin Lesions

The need for diagnosing malignant melanoma in its earliest stages results in an increasing number of unnecessary excisions. Objective criteria beyond the visual inspection are needed to distinguish between benign and malignant melanocytic tumors in vivo. Fluorescence spectra collected during the prospective, multicenter observational study (“FLIMMA”) were retrospectively analyzed by the newly developed machine learning algorithm. The formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue samples of 214 pigmented skin lesions (PSLs) from 144 patients were examined by two independent pathologists in addition to the first diagnosis from the FLIMMA study, resulting in three histopathological results per sample. The support vector machine classifier was trained on 17,918 fluorescence spectra from 49 lesions labeled as malignant (1) and benign (0) by three histopathologists. A scoring system that scales linearly with the number of the “malignant spectra” was designed to classify the lesion as malignant melanoma (score > 28) or non-melanoma (score ≤ 28). Finally, the scoring algorithm was validated on 165 lesions to ensure model prediction power and to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of dermatofluoroscopy in melanoma detection. The scoring algorithm revealed a sensitivity of 91.7% and a specificity of 83.0% in diagnosing malignant melanoma. Using additionally the image segmentation for normalization of lesions’ region of interest, a further improvement of sensitivity of 95.8% was achieved, with a corresponding specificity of 80.9%.

Visual inspection and dermoscopy, alone or in combination, for diagnosing keratinocyte skin cancers in adults

BACKGROUND

Early accurate detection of all skin cancer types is important to guide appropriate management, to reduce morbidity and to improve survival. Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is almost always a localised skin cancer with potential to infiltrate and damage surrounding tissue, whereas a minority of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cSCCs) and invasive melanomas are higher-risk skin cancers with the potential to metastasise and cause death. Dermoscopy has become an important tool to assist specialist clinicians in the diagnosis of melanoma, and is increasingly used in primary-care settings. Dermoscopy is a precision-built handheld illuminated magnifier that allows more detailed examination of the skin down to the level of the superficial dermis. Establishing the value of dermoscopy over and above visual inspection for the diagnosis of BCC or cSCC in primary- and secondary-care settings is critical to understanding its potential contribution to appropriate skin cancer triage, including referral of higher-risk cancers to secondary care, the identification of low-risk skin cancers that might be treated in primary care and to provide reassurance to those with benign skin lesions who can be safely discharged.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection and dermoscopy, alone or in combination, for the detection of (a) BCC and (b) cSCC, in adults. We separated studies according to whether the diagnosis was recorded face-to-face (in person) or based on remote (image-based) assessment.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies of any design that evaluated visual inspection or dermoscopy or both in adults with lesions suspicious for skin cancer, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where information related to the target condition or diagnostic thresholds were missing. We estimated accuracy using hierarchical summary ROC methods. We undertook analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests. To facilitate interpretation of results, we computed values of sensitivity at the point on the SROC curve with 80% fixed specificity and values of specificity with 80% fixed sensitivity. We investigated the impact of in-person test interpretation; use of a purposely-developed algorithm to assist diagnosis; and observer expertise.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 publications reporting on 24 study cohorts, providing 27 visual inspection datasets (8805 lesions; 2579 malignancies) and 33 dermoscopy datasets (6855 lesions; 1444 malignancies). The risk of bias was mainly low for the index test (for dermoscopy evaluations) and reference standard domains, particularly for in-person evaluations, and high or unclear for participant selection, application of the index test for visual inspection and for participant flow and timing. We scored concerns about the applicability of study findings as of 'high' or 'unclear' concern for almost all studies across all domains assessed. Selective participant recruitment, lack of reproducibility of diagnostic thresholds and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.The detection of BCC was reported in 28 datasets; 15 on an in-person basis and 13 image-based. Analysis of studies by prior testing of participants and according to observer expertise was not possible due to lack of data. Studies were primarily conducted in participants referred for specialist assessment of lesions with available histological classification. We found no clear differences in accuracy between dermoscopy studies undertaken in person and those which evaluated images. The lack of effect observed may be due to other sources of heterogeneity, including variations in the types of skin lesion studied, in dermatoscopes used, or in the use of algorithms and varying thresholds for deciding on a positive test result.Meta-analysis found in-person evaluations of dermoscopy (7 evaluations; 4683 lesions and 363 BCCs) to be more accurate than visual inspection alone for the detection of BCC (8 evaluations; 7017 lesions and 1586 BCCs), with a relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) of 8.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.5 to 19.3; P < 0.001). This corresponds to predicted differences in sensitivity of 14% (93% versus 79%) at a fixed specificity of 80% and predicted differences in specificity of 22% (99% versus 77%) at a fixed sensitivity of 80%. We observed very similar results for the image-based evaluations.When applied to a hypothetical population of 1000 lesions, of which 170 are BCC (based on median BCC prevalence across studies), an increased sensitivity of 14% from dermoscopy would lead to 24 fewer BCCs missed, assuming 166 false positive results from both tests. A 22% increase in specificity from dermoscopy with sensitivity fixed at 80% would result in 183 fewer unnecessary excisions, assuming 34 BCCs missed for both tests. There was not enough evidence to assess the use of algorithms or structured checklists for either visual inspection or dermoscopy.Insufficient data were available to draw conclusions on the accuracy of either test for the detection of cSCCs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Dermoscopy may be a valuable tool for the diagnosis of BCC as an adjunct to visual inspection of a suspicious skin lesion following a thorough history-taking including assessment of risk factors for keratinocyte cancer. The evidence primarily comes from secondary-care (referred) populations and populations with pigmented lesions or mixed lesion types. There is no clear evidence supporting the use of currently-available formal algorithms to assist dermoscopy diagnosis.

Dermoscopy, with and without visual inspection, for diagnosing melanoma in adults

BACKGROUND

Melanoma has one of the fastest rising incidence rates of any cancer. It accounts for a small percentage of skin cancer cases but is responsible for the majority of skin cancer deaths. Although history-taking and visual inspection of a suspicious lesion by a clinician are usually the first in a series of 'tests' to diagnose skin cancer, dermoscopy has become an important tool to assist diagnosis by specialist clinicians and is increasingly used in primary care settings. Dermoscopy is a magnification technique using visible light that allows more detailed examination of the skin compared to examination by the naked eye alone. Establishing the additive value of dermoscopy over and above visual inspection alone across a range of observers and settings is critical to understanding its contribution for the diagnosis of melanoma and to future understanding of the potential role of the growing number of other high-resolution image analysis techniques.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy alone, or when added to visual inspection of a skin lesion, for the detection of cutaneous invasive melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants in adults. We separated studies according to whether the diagnosis was recorded face-to-face (in-person), or based on remote (image-based), assessment.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies of any design that evaluated dermoscopy in adults with lesions suspicious for melanoma, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up. Data on the accuracy of visual inspection, to allow comparisons of tests, was included only if reported in the included studies of dermoscopy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where information related to the target condition or diagnostic threshold were missing. We estimated accuracy using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC),methods. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. To facilitate interpretation of results, we computed values of sensitivity at the point on the SROC curve with 80% fixed specificity and values of specificity with 80% fixed sensitivity. We investigated the impact of in-person test interpretation; use of a purposely developed algorithm to assist diagnosis; observer expertise; and dermoscopy training.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 104 study publications reporting on 103 study cohorts with 42,788 lesions (including 5700 cases), providing 354 datasets for dermoscopy. The risk of bias was mainly low for the index test and reference standard domains and mainly high or unclear for participant selection and participant flow. Concerns regarding the applicability of study findings were largely scored as 'high' concern in three of four domains assessed. Selective participant recruitment, lack of reproducibility of diagnostic thresholds and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.The accuracy of dermoscopy for the detection of invasive melanoma or atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants was reported in 86 datasets; 26 for evaluations conducted in person (dermoscopy added to visual inspection), and 60 for image-based evaluations (diagnosis based on interpretation of dermoscopic images). Analyses of studies by prior testing revealed no obvious effect on accuracy; analyses were hampered by the lack of studies in primary care, lack of relevant information and the restricted inclusion of lesions selected for biopsy or excision. Accuracy was higher for in-person diagnosis compared to image-based evaluations (relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) 4.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4 to 9.0; P < 0.001).We compared accuracy for (a), in-person evaluations of dermoscopy (26 evaluations; 23,169 lesions and 1664 melanomas),versus visual inspection alone (13 evaluations; 6740 lesions and 459 melanomas), and for (b), image-based evaluations of dermoscopy (60 evaluations; 13,475 lesions and 2851 melanomas),versus image-based visual inspection (11 evaluations; 1740 lesions and 305 melanomas). For both comparisons, meta-analysis found dermoscopy to be more accurate than visual inspection alone, with RDORs of (a), 4.7 (95% CI 3.0 to 7.5; P < 0.001), and (b), 5.6 (95% CI 3.7 to 8.5; P < 0.001). For a), the predicted difference in sensitivity at a fixed specificity of 80% was 16% (95% CI 8% to 23%; 92% for dermoscopy + visual inspection versus 76% for visual inspection), and predicted difference in specificity at a fixed sensitivity of 80% was 20% (95% CI 7% to 33%; 95% for dermoscopy + visual inspection versus 75% for visual inspection). For b) the predicted differences in sensitivity was 34% (95% CI 24% to 46%; 81% for dermoscopy versus 47% for visual inspection), at a fixed specificity of 80%, and predicted difference in specificity was 40% (95% CI 27% to 57%; 82% for dermoscopy versus 42% for visual inspection), at a fixed sensitivity of 80%.Using the median prevalence of disease in each set of studies ((a), 12% for in-person and (b), 24% for image-based), for a hypothetical population of 1000 lesions, an increase in sensitivity of (a), 16% (in-person), and (b), 34% (image-based), from using dermoscopy at a fixed specificity of 80% equates to a reduction in the number of melanomas missed of (a), 19 and (b), 81 with (a), 176 and (b), 152 false positive results. An increase in specificity of (a), 20% (in-person), and (b), 40% (image-based), at a fixed sensitivity of 80% equates to a reduction in the number of unnecessary excisions from using dermoscopy of (a), 176 and (b), 304 with (a), 24 and (b), 48 melanomas missed.The use of a named or published algorithm to assist dermoscopy interpretation (as opposed to no reported algorithm or reported use of pattern analysis), had no significant impact on accuracy either for in-person (RDOR 1.4, 95% CI 0.34 to 5.6; P = 0.17), or image-based (RDOR 1.4, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.3; P = 0.22), evaluations. This result was supported by subgroup analysis according to algorithm used. We observed higher accuracy for observers reported as having high experience and for those classed as 'expert consultants' in comparison to those considered to have less experience in dermoscopy, particularly for image-based evaluations. Evidence for the effect of dermoscopy training on test accuracy was very limited but suggested associated improvements in sensitivity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the observed limitations in the evidence base, dermoscopy is a valuable tool to support the visual inspection of a suspicious skin lesion for the detection of melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants, particularly in referred populations and in the hands of experienced users. Data to support its use in primary care are limited, however, it may assist in triaging suspicious lesions for urgent referral when employed by suitably trained clinicians. Formal algorithms may be of most use for dermoscopy training purposes and for less expert observers, however reliable data comparing approaches using dermoscopy in person are lacking.

Impact of clinical and personal data in the dermoscopic differentiation between early melanoma and atypical nevi

Background

Differential diagnosis of clinically atypical nevi (aN) and early melanomas (eMM) still represents a challenge even for experienced dermoscopists, as dermoscopy alone is not sufficient to adequately differentiate these equivocal melanocytic skin lesions (MSLs).

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to investigate what were the most relevant parameters for noninvasive differential diagnosis between eMM and aN among clinical, personal, and dermoscopic data and to evaluate their impact as risk factors for malignancy.

Methods

This was a retrospective study performed on 450 MSLs excised from 2014 to 2016 with a suspicion of malignancy. Dermoscopic standardized images of the 450 MSLs (300 aN and 150 eMM) were collected and evaluated. Patients’ personal data (ie, age, gender, body site, maximum diameter) were also recorded. Dermoscopic evaluations were performed by 5 different experts in dermoscopy blinded to histopathological diagnosis. Fleiss’ κ was calculated to measure concordance level between experts in the description of dermoscopic parameters for each MSL. The power of the studied variables in discriminating malignant from benign lesions was also investigated through F-statistics.

Results

The variables age and maximum diameter supplied the highest discriminant power (F = 253 and 227, respectively). Atypical network, blue white veil and white shiny streaks were the most significant dermoscopic patterns suggestive of malignancy (F = 110, 104 and 99.5, respectively). Shiny white streaks was the only dermoscopic parameter to obtain satisfactory concordance value. Gender was not a discriminant factor. The specific statistical weight of clinical and personal data (ie, “patient’s age” and “lesion diameter”) surpassed those of atypical dermoscopic features.

Conclusions

The objective clinical and personal data collected here could supply a fundamental contribution in the correct diagnosis of equivocal MSLs and should be included in diagnostic algorithms along with significant dermoscopic features (ie, atypical network, blue-white veil, and shiny white streaks).

Reflectance confocal microscopy analysis of equivocal melanocytic lesions with severe regression

BACKGROUND

The differential diagnosis between regressing nevi and melanoma might be challenging; regressing areas can represent a confounding factor for the diagnosis and the histology still remain mandatory to rule out melanoma. Reflectance confocal microscopy may add valuable information by revealing features suggestive of the nature of the melanocytic proliferation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of confocal microscopy in the management of regressive melanocytic lesions.

METHODS

The dermoscopic analysis of 92 melanocytic lesions showing that more than 30% of regressions have been retrospectively considered, among them, 32 melanocytic lesions with a 7 check point list ≥3 they were assessed at the rcm and subsequently excised. For each selected lesion, dermoscopic features of regression (white scar-like areas, blue areas, blue white areas), distribution of regressing areas (central, peripheral, or both) and the percentage of regression have been examined by an expert in dermoscopy, blinded to the histological and confocal diagnosis. Subsequently, two experts in confocal microscopy revaluated, blinded from histology, RCM images.

RESULTS

Of the 32 lesions analyzed, 23 (71.5%) were diagnosed histologically as nevi, and 9 (28.5%) as melanomas. 26 of 32 lesions (81.5%) exhibited regression >50% of the overall. On RCM, 11 lesions have been interpreted as malignant and 21 as benign. On RCM the majority of nevi exhibited regular architecture without cytological atypia. Epidermal disarray, pagetoid infiltration, disarranged dermo-epidermal junction architecture and atypical nests were considered as suspicious for malignancy. Good concordance between confocal readers has been detected.

CONCLUSION

A combined dermoscopic/confocal approach can be used for the management of lesions exhibiting dermoscopic features of regression in order to provide a more conclusive pre-histological diagnosis avoiding a high number of unnecessary excisions. Limits of this study were represented by the relatively small number of lesions and the retrospective approach. Further, prospective studies on a larger number of cases, will be necessary in order to compare the efficacy of dermoscopy alone versus dermoscopy in combination with RCM for the evaluation of regression, suspected pigmented lesions.