Comparison of dermatoscopic diagnostic algorithms based on calculation: The ABCD rule of dermatoscopy, the seven-point checklist, the three-point checklist and the CASH algorithm in dermatoscopic evaluation of melanocytic lesions

Understanding the anatomy of dermoscopy of melanocytic skin tumours: Correlation in vivo with line-field optical coherence tomography

BACKGROUND

Early melanoma detection is the main factor affecting prognosis and survival. For that reason, non-invasive technologies have been developed to provide a more accurate diagnosis. Recently, line-field confocal optical coherence tomography (LC-OCT) was developed to provide an in vivo, imaging device, with deep penetration and cellular resolution in three dimensions. Combining the advantages of conventional OCT and reflectance confocal microscopy, this tool seems to be particularly suitable for melanocytic lesions.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to identify and describe the correlation between specific dermoscopic criteria and LC-OCT features in three dimensions associated with melanocytic lesions.

METHODS

Dermoscopic and LC-OCT images of 126 melanocytic lesions were acquired in three different centres. The following dermoscopic criteria have been considered: reticular pattern, dots and globules, structureless areas, blue-whitish veil, regression structures, negative network, homogeneous pattern, streaks and blotches.

RESULTS

69 (55%) benign and 57 (45%) malignant lesions were analysed. A regular reticular pattern was found associated in the 75% of the cases with the presence of elongated rete ridges with pigmented cells along the basal layer, while atypical reticular pattern showed an irregular organization of rete ridges with melanocytic hyperplasia, broadened and fused ridges and elongated nests. Both typical and atypical dots and globules were found associated with melanocytic nests in the dermis or at the dermoepidermal junction (DEJ), as well as with keratin cysts/pseudocysts. Grey globules corresponded to the presence of melanin-containing dermal inflammatory cells (melanophages) within the papillae. Structureless brown/black areas correlated with alterations of the DEJ. We observed the same DEJ alterations, but with the presence of dermal melanophages, in 36% of the cases of blue/white/grey structureless areas. A description of each LC-OCT/dermoscopy correlation was made.

CONCLUSIONS

LC-OCT permitted for the first time to perform an in vivo, 3D correlation between dermoscopic criteria and pathological-like features of melanocytic lesions.

SkinNet-INIO: Multiclass Skin Lesion Localization and Classification Using Fusion-Assisted Deep Neural Networks and Improved Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithm

Background: Using artificial intelligence (AI) with the concept of a deep learning-based automated computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system has shown improved performance for skin lesion classification. Although deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) have significantly improved many image classification tasks, it is still difficult to accurately classify skin lesions because of a lack of training data, inter-class similarity, intra-class variation, and the inability to concentrate on semantically significant lesion parts. Innovations: To address these issues, we proposed an automated deep learning and best feature selection framework for multiclass skin lesion classification in dermoscopy images. The proposed framework performs a preprocessing step at the initial step for contrast enhancement using a new technique that is based on dark channel haze and top-bottom filtering. Three pre-trained deep learning models are fine-tuned in the next step and trained using the transfer learning concept. In the fine-tuning process, we added and removed a few additional layers to lessen the parameters and later selected the hyperparameters using a genetic algorithm (GA) instead of manual assignment. The purpose of hyperparameter selection using GA is to improve the learning performance. After that, the deeper layer is selected for each network and deep features are extracted. The extracted deep features are fused using a novel serial correlation-based approach. This technique reduces the feature vector length to the serial-based approach, but there is little redundant information. We proposed an improved anti-Lion optimization algorithm for the best feature selection to address this issue. The selected features are finally classified using machine learning algorithms. Main Results: The experimental process was conducted using two publicly available datasets, ISIC2018 and ISIC2019. Employing these datasets, we obtained an accuracy of 96.1 and 99.9%, respectively. Comparison was also conducted with state-of-the-art techniques and shows the proposed framework improved accuracy. Conclusions: The proposed framework successfully enhances the contrast of the cancer region. Moreover, the selection of hyperparameters using the automated techniques improved the learning process of the proposed framework. The proposed fusion and improved version of the selection process maintains the best accuracy and shorten the computational time.

The Study of Usefulness of a Set of Fractal Parameters to Build Classes of Disease Units Based on Images of Pigmented Skin Lesions

Dermatoscopic images are also increasingly used to train artificial neural networks for the future to provide fully automatic diagnostic systems capable of determining the type of pigmented skin lesion. Therefore, fractal analysis was used in this study to measure the irregularity of pigmented skin lesion surfaces. This paper presents selected results from individual stages of preliminary processing of the dermatoscopic image on pigmented skin lesion, in which fractal analysis was used and referred to the effectiveness of classification by fuzzy or statistical methods. Classification of the first unsupervised stage was performed using the method of analysis of scatter graphs and the fuzzy method using the Kohonen network. The results of the Kohonen network learning process with an input vector consisting of eight elements prove that neuronal activation requires a larger learning set with greater differentiation. For the same training conditions, the final results are at a higher level and can be classified as weaker. Statistics of factor analysis were proposed, allowing for the reduction in variables, and the directions of further studies were indicated.

Flat scalp melanoma dermoscopic and reflectance confocal microscopy features correspond to histopathologic type and lesion location

Background

Dermoscopy and Reflectance Confocal Microscopy (RCM) features of scalp melanoma according to lesion location and histopathology have not been fully investigated.

Objectives

To reveal dermoscopic and RCM features of scalp melanoma according to lesion location and histopathology.

Methods

We retrospectively retrieved images of suspicious, atypical excised, flat melanocytic lesions of the scalp, assessed on dermoscopy and RCM at five centres, from June 2007 to April 2020. Lesions were classified according to histopathological diagnoses of nevi, lentigo maligna melanoma (LM/LMM) or superficial spreading melanoma (SSM). Clinical, dermoscopic and RCM images were evaluated; LM/LMM and SSM subtypes were compared through multivariate analysis.

Results

Two hundred forty‐seven lesions were included. In situ melanomas were mostly LM (81.3%), while invasive melanomas were mostly SSM (75.8%). Male sex, baldness and chronic sun‐damaged skin were associated with all types of melanomas and in particular with LM/LMM. LMs were mostly located in the vertex area and SSM in the frontal (OR: 8.8; P < 0.05, CI 95%) and temporal (OR: 16.7; P < 0.005, CI 95%) areas. The dermoscopy presence of pseudo‐network, pigmented rhomboidal structures, obliterated hair follicles and annular–granular pattern were associated with LM diagnoses, whereas bluish‐white veil was more typical of SSM. Observations on RCM of atypical roundish and dendritic cells in the epidermis were associated with SSM (42.4%) and dendritic cells with LM (62.5%) diagnoses. Folliculotropism on RCM was confirmed as a typical sign of LM.

Conclusions

Flat scalp melanomas reveal specific dermoscopic and RCM features according to histopathologic type and scalp location.

Detection of Malignant Melanoma Using Artificial Intelligence: An Observational Study of Diagnostic Accuracy

BACKGROUND

Malignant melanoma can most successfully be cured when diagnosed at an early stage in the natural history. However, there is controversy over screening programs and many advocate screening only for high-risk individuals.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of an artificial intelligence neural network (Deep Ensemble for Recognition of Melanoma [DERM]) to identify malignant melanoma from dermoscopic images of pigmented skin lesions and to show how this compared to doctors' performance assessed by meta-analysis.

METHODS

DERM was trained and tested using 7,102 dermoscopic images of both histologically confirmed melanoma (24%) and benign pigmented lesions (76%). A meta-analysis was conducted of studies examining the accuracy of naked-eye examination, with or without dermoscopy, by specialist and general physicians whose clinical diagnosis was compared to histopathology. The meta-analysis was based on evaluation of 32,226 pigmented lesions including 3,277 histopathology-confirmed malignant melanoma cases. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to examine and compare the diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

DERM achieved a ROC area under the curve (AUC) of 0.93 (95% confidence interval: 0.92-0.94), and sensitivity and specificity of 85.0% and 85.3%, respectively. Avoidance of false-negative results is essential, so different decision thresholds were examined. At 95% sensitivity DERM achieved a specificity of 64.1% and at 95% specificity the sensitivity was 67%. The meta-analysis showed primary care physicians (10 studies) achieve an AUC of 0.83 (95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.86), with sensitivity and specificity of 79.9% and 70.9%; and dermatologists (92 studies) 0.91 (0.88-0.93), 87.5%, and 81.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

DERM has the potential to be used as a decision support tool in primary care, by providing dermatologist-grade recommendation on the likelihood of malignant melanoma.

Visual inspection for diagnosing cutaneous 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. History-taking and visual inspection of a suspicious lesion by a clinician is usually the first in a series of 'tests' to diagnose skin cancer. Establishing the accuracy of visual inspection alone is critical to understating the potential contribution of additional tests to assist in the diagnosis of melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection for the detection of cutaneous invasive melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants in adults with limited prior testing and in those referred for further evaluation of a suspicious lesion. Studies were separated 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; 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

Test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated visual inspection in adults with lesions suspicious for melanoma, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up. We excluded studies reporting data for 'clinical diagnosis' where dermoscopy may or may not have been used.

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 summary sensitivities and specificities per algorithm and threshold using the bivariate hierarchical model. 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 49 publications reporting on a total of 51 study cohorts with 34,351 lesions (including 2499 cases), providing 134 datasets for visual inspection. Across almost all study quality domains, the majority of study reports provided insufficient information to allow us to judge the risk of bias, while in three of four domains that we assessed we scored concerns regarding applicability of study findings as 'high'. Selective participant recruitment, lack of detail regarding the threshold for deciding on a positive test result, and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.Attempts to analyse studies by degree of prior testing were hampered by a lack of relevant information and by the restricted inclusion of lesions selected for biopsy or excision. Accuracy was generally much higher for in-person diagnosis compared to image-based evaluations (relative diagnostic odds ratio of 8.54, 95% CI 2.89 to 25.3, P < 0.001). Meta-analysis of in-person evaluations that could be clearly placed on the clinical pathway showed a general trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, with the highest sensitivity (92.4%, 95% CI 26.2% to 99.8%) and lowest specificity (79.7%, 95% CI 73.7% to 84.7%) observed in participants with limited prior testing (n = 3 datasets). Summary sensitivities were lower for those referred for specialist assessment but with much higher specificities (e.g. sensitivity 76.7%, 95% CI 61.7% to 87.1%) and specificity 95.7%, 95% CI 89.7% to 98.3%) for lesions selected for excision, n = 8 datasets). These differences may be related to differences in the spectrum of included lesions, differences in the definition of a positive test result, or to variations in observer expertise. We did not find clear evidence that accuracy is improved by the use of any algorithm to assist diagnosis in all settings. Attempts to examine the effect of observer expertise in melanoma diagnosis were hindered due to poor reporting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Visual inspection is a fundamental component of the assessment of a suspicious skin lesion; however, the evidence suggests that melanomas will be missed if visual inspection is used on its own. The evidence to support its accuracy in the range of settings in which it is used is flawed and very poorly reported. Although published algorithms do not appear to improve accuracy, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the 'no algorithm' approach should be preferred in all settings. Despite the volume of research evaluating visual inspection, further prospective evaluation of the potential added value of using established algorithms according to the prior testing or diagnostic difficulty of lesions may be warranted.

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.

Diagnosing malignant melanoma in ambulatory care: a systematic review of clinical prediction rules

OBJECTIVES

Malignant melanoma has high morbidity and mortality rates. Early diagnosis improves prognosis. Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) can be used to stratify patients with symptoms of suspected malignant melanoma to improve early diagnosis. We conducted a systematic review of CPRs for melanoma diagnosis in ambulatory care.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, PROSPERO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and SCOPUS was conducted in May 2015, using combinations of keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH) terms.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Studies deriving and validating, validating or assessing the impact of a CPR for predicting melanoma diagnosis in ambulatory care were included. Data extraction and methodological quality assessment were guided by the CHARMS checklist.

RESULTS

From 16 334 studies reviewed, 51 were included, validating the performance of 24 unique CPRs. Three impact analysis studies were identified. Five studies were set in primary care. The most commonly evaluated CPRs were the ABCD, more than one or uneven distribution of Colour, or a large (greater than 6 mm) Diameter (ABCD) dermoscopy rule (at a cut-point of >4.75; 8 studies; pooled sensitivity 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.93, specificity 0.72, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.78) and the 7-point dermoscopy checklist (at a cut-point of ≥1 recommending ruling in melanoma; 11 studies; pooled sensitivity 0.77, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.88, specificity 0.80, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.92). The methodological quality of studies varied.

CONCLUSIONS

At their recommended cut-points, the ABCD dermoscopy rule is more useful for ruling out melanoma than the 7-point dermoscopy checklist. A focus on impact analysis will help translate melanoma risk prediction rules into useful tools for clinical practice.

CASH algorithm versus 3-point checklist and its modified version in evaluation of melanocytic pigmented skin lesions: The 4-point checklist

Dermoscopy, in expert hands, increases accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions of a single operator, compared with clinical examination. Simplified algorithmic methods have been developed to help less expert dermoscopists in diagnosis of melanocytic lesions. This study included 125 melanocytic skin lesions divided into melanocytic nevi, dysplastic nevi and thin melanomas (<1 mm). We compared the 3-point checklist and CASH algorithm to analyze different pigmented skin lesions. Based on preliminary results, we proposed a new modified algorithm, called the 4-point checklist, whose accuracy is similar to the CASH algorithm and whose simplicity is similar to the 3-point checklist.