Primary cutaneous perivascular epithelioid cell tumors: two cases and a review of the literature

Report _Case Presentation _Photo Vignette _Letter Authors declare that the contents of this article are their own original unpublished findings. Title: Primary cutaneous perivascular epithelioid cell tumors: two cases and a review of the literature Authors: Jennifer Wong1 DO, Jason Mammino2 DO, Jennifer Seyffert3 DO, Kristen Schmits4 MD, Etan Marks4 MD, Daniel Rivlin3 MD Affiliations: 1Department of Dermatology, LECOM- Larkin Community Hospital, Miami, Florida, USA, 2Department of Dermatology, KCUMB - Advanced Dermatology and Cosmetic Surgery, Orlando, Florida, USA, 3Department of Dermatology, LECOM- Skin and Cancer Associates, Miami Beach, Florida, USA, 4Department of Dermatopathology Advanced Dermatology and Cosmetic Surgery Pathology Laboratory, Delray Beach, Florida, USA Corresponding Author: Jennifer Seyffert DO, 4308 Alton Road, Suite 510, Miami Beach, FL 33140, Tel: 305-674-8865, Fax: 305-674-1459, Email: jseyf12@gmail.com Abstract: Perivascular epithelioid cell tumors, also known as PEComas, are mesenchymal neoplasms which uncommonly originate within the skin, with only 23 cases documented within the literature. These rare neoplasms classically display epithelioid cells composed of granular or clear cytoplasm arranged in sheets, nests, or cords. Their immunoreactivity for melanocytic and smooth muscle markers makes these tumors distinct and unique.[1] We herein present two cases of primary cutaneous PEComas that clinically mimic other common cutaneous neoplasms and illustrate the necessity for clinical-pathologic correlation. A literature review is also presented to compare the different clinical and histological presentations of cutaneous PEComas.

Use of artificial intelligence for analyzing emotion vs patient global impression of change of melanoma treatments

e24177

Background: The link between melanoma patients’ emotions and their impressions of treatments response are poorly understood. With the rise of social media, patients use online platforms to communicate their concerns related to melanoma treatments. In this study, we utilize real-world data collected from social media with search terms focused on treatment-specific Patients’ Global Impression of Change (PGIC) compared with their emotions. We aim to identify and focus melanoma patient perspective trends to improve patient-centered care. Methods: Social media data mining of search terms were extracted from millions of publicly available interactions on Twitter and other online platforms from May/2008 to January/2020 using Crimson Hexagon (database of real-time social media posts). Results: For chemotherapy posts, the top three emotions by volume were negative alongside negative PGIC “worse” (Worse/Sadness 700, Worse/Fear 596, Worse/Disgust 403, and “decline” (Decline/Sadness 262, Decline/Fear 186, Decline/Disgust 57). Interestingly, Sadness, Fear, and Disgust were as prevalent alongside positive PGIC “well” and “cured” (Well/Sadness 3577, Well/Fear 2545, and Well/Disgust 1770; Cured/Sadness 518, Cured/Disgust 275, and Cured/Fear 167). For Keytruda treatment posts, emotions in negative PGIC “worse” were (Worse/Fear 117, Worse/Anger 68, Worse/Sadness 6). In positive PGIC “well”, results were (Well/Fear 880, Well/Sadness 366, Well/Anger 186). Further analysis will compare these emotional sentiments with a spectrum of PGIC terms and specific types of melanoma treatments. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first investigation of online patient melanoma treatments associated with PGIC terms. The findings indicate a trend of negative emotions even when patients have reported wellness or being cured by treatment. While treatments may be effective, patients are not necessarily satisfied. Correlating changes in emotions with perceived changes in disease severity can provide insight into patient perspectives, which has implications in translating clinical response and a need for continued emotional support in patients with treatment response.

Exploring the clinical efficacy of the total body skin exam

10078

Background: The clinical efficacy of the total body skin exam has long been the subject of debate. A 2016 report by the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) found the current body of evidence was “insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in [asymptomatic] adults.’’ However, the USPSTF based its recommendations on studies evaluating mainly the ability of primary care physicians to diagnose melanoma through total body skin exams (TBSE). This study seeks to address this insufficiency in the current literature by exploring the clinical efficacy of the dermatology provider performed TBSEs as a screening tool with respect to the detection of malignant melanoma (MM), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and basal cell carcinoma (BCC). Methods: A search was performed within the electronic medical record of a large multi-state dermatology group practice for all instances of new and established patient office visits occurring from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019. Per practice policy, it is denoted whether each office visit includes a TBSE or partial skin exam (PSE). The number of MM, SCC, and BCC diagnoses made within the context of each class of skin exam was analyzed. Results: Of the 930,706 office visits analyzed, 438,027 TBSEs and 492,679 PSEs were performed. For each of the three types of skin cancer surveyed, the number of cancers diagnosed in the context of a TBSE was significantly greater than the number diagnosed in the context of a PSE. One MM was diagnosed per 161.0 TBSEs and 371.3 PSEs ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 930706) = 662, p < 0.001). One SCC was diagnosed per 56.7 TBSEs and 108.4 PSEs ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 930706) = 1258.5, p < 0.001). One BCC was diagnosed per 10.2 TBSEs and 17.8 PSEs ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 930706) = 5884, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Skin cancer is detected at significantly higher rates in TBSEs than PSEs. The finding that one MM is detected in 161 TBSEs may be compared to one cervical cancer is detected in 3,776 Pap smears. Thus, a TBSE is 23.5 times more likely to identify a MM than a Pap smear is to identify a cervical cancer. This trend holds even when adjusted for prevalence. Further analysis will allow for the comparison of exam types with respect to patient age, staging, lesion size, and Breslow depth at time of cancer diagnosis. This continued analysis will allow for a more detailed risk benefit-analysis and insight into the clinical efficacy of the TBSE.

Surgical wound dehiscence in dermatologic surgery

e22101

Background: Surgical wound dehiscence (SWD) describes separation of wound edges due to mechanical failure of a healing wound. The rate of SWD following dermatology office-based surgery and factors associated with its occurrence are poorly characterized in the current literature. This study aims to elucidate factors contributing to SWD following cutaneous excisions of malignant and non-malignant through a novel data mining methodology. The utility of this methodology in quality assurance and risk management applications will be concomitantly explored. Methods: An electronic query directed at the electronic medical record (EMR) database of a large national dermatology practice employing over 400 providers yielded 22,548 instances of cutaneous excision meeting inclusion criteria between 1 January 2018 and 9 September 2019. To control for confounding, procedures positive for SWD were randomly matched in 1:4 ratio with procedures negative for SWD on the basis of sex, age, and precise anatomic location. Procedures were then statistically analyzed to elucidate factors associated with SWD. Results: Of 22,548 procedures analyzed, 123 were positive for wound dehiscence, yielding an incidence of 0.54%. Age ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 615) = 2.49, p = 0.039), smoking history ( Χ2 ( df = 2, N = 534) = 9.97, p = 0.007), wound location on the distal extremities ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 615) = 9.54, p = 0.002), presence of postoperative infection ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 600) = 34.87, p < 0.001), and presence of postoperative bleeding ( Χ2 ( df = 1, N = 600) = 62.73, p < 0.001) are all significantly associated with SWD. A wound positive for postoperative infection or bleeding has 14.48 times the odds of being positive for SWD (95% CI: 4.62 - 45.21). A wound positive for postoperative bleeding has 20.15 times the odds of being positive for SWD (95% CI: 7.42 – 54.73). No significant relationship between SWD and sex, diabetes, or provider type is evident. Conclusions: Age, smoking history, wound location on the distal extremities, and especially other postoperative complications such as bleeding and infection are associated with SWD. There is no association between SWD and sex, diabetes, or provider type. Forthcoming multifactorial, nonlinear, non-time-dependent analysis of variables may allow for the development of a statistical model to provide greater insight into SWD following dermatologic surgery.