The importance of a full clinical examination: assessment of index lesions referred to a skin cancer clinic without a total body skin examination would miss one in three melanomas

Factors for not performing total body skin examinations in primary care in association with teledermoscopy

PURPOSE

To investigate factors related to omitted total body skin examination (TBSE) in skin cancer diagnostics while managing patients using teledermoscopy (TDS) in Swedish primary care.

METHODS

4,987 TDS referrals from primary care centers were analyzed to identify factors associated with failing to perform TBSE. Data collected included age, gender of patient and physician, and reason for a visit. Logistic regression was used to test the association between the variables and risk of failing to complete a TBSE.

RESULTS

The risk for omitted TBSE is higher in older patients, females, patients whose primary reason for seeking care was not specifically for a complete skin check, and with female physician. Patients > 80 years had more than four times increased risk of not undergoing TBSE compared to the youngest (< 30 y). The strongest correlation to omitting TBSE was with other reasons for primary care visits than "skin check". Male gender of the patient and being examined by male physicians decreased the risk of omitted TBSE by 20% and 30%, respectively. There was no evidence of interaction between the gender of the patient and the physician.

CONCLUSION

Since TDS reduces the opportunities to have a TBSE by dermatologists, the standard management of patients with suspicious skin lesions in primary care must be revised and evidence-based. TBSE is strongly recommended for patients with increased risk of skin cancer, for example old persons with fair skin and a history of skin cancer, when managing them with TDS.

Triple Synchronous Primary Melanomas in a 77-Year-Old Sea Captain: Importance of Total Skin Examination

When it comes to skin diseases, melanomas are considered the most lethal. Triple synchronous primary melanomas (SPMs) are rare. Here we have reported a case of a 77-year-old white male with three SPMs. The patient presented with a nodular melanoma in the upper left back; total skin examination (TSE) revealed additional melanomas in the right retroauricular region and on the left arm. The patient was unaware of these two additional melanomas that were only found because of the routine TSE, and the index lesion focused examination would have missed both. We advocate that TSE should be practised routinely by all dermatologists for all new patients, and also, from time to time in patients attending long-term follow-up appointments. Early diagnosis means simpler treatments and more favourable outcomes.

The impact of physician support on skin self-examination among melanoma patients: A serial mediation model with self-efficacy and intentions to perform skin exams

OBJECTIVE

Melanoma is the most lethal of skin cancers; however, survival rates are excellent if the tumor is detected early. Clinical practice guidelines for melanoma follow-up care recommend regular skin self-examination (SSE) for individuals at high risk for melanoma. The current analyses tested whether self-efficacy for SSE and intention to perform SSE mediate the relationship between physician support for SSE and SSE behavior among a sample of melanoma patients.

METHODS

We ran a serial mediation model on a cross-sectional sample of melanoma patients (n = 154) drawn from an observational study with longitudinal follow-up.

RESULTS

Self-efficacy and intention to perform SSE sequentially mediated the relationship between physician support and SSE behaviors (β = .31, t(152) = 3.61, p < .001 without mediators versus β = .11, t(150) = 1.50, p = .14 with mediators), as supported by a significant total indirect effect (β = .21, [95 % CI = .08-.35]).

CONCLUSION

Self-efficacy for SSE and intention to perform SSE together explain the link between perceived physician support for SSE and the practice of SSE.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physician communication about the importance of SSE plays an important role in encouraging patient adherence to SSE recommendations and, thus, supporting early detection efforts.

Identification of Incidental Skin Cancers Among Adults Referred to Dermatologists for Suspicious Skin Lesions

IMPORTANCE

The incidence of skin cancer is increasing and evaluation of the utility of total body skin examination (TBSE) in detecting incidental skin cancers is warranted.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the proportion and rate of incidental skin cancer detection in urgent skin cancer clinics and investigate the rate of incidental skin cancer detection in 2 groups based on the degree of clinical suspicion of the index lesion for malignancy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study with a case note review of consecutive secondary care consultations was conducted using data from 2 urgent suspected skin cancer screening clinics in UK National Health Service trusts. The study was performed from January 1, 2015, to March 31, 2016, and data analysis was performed from October 14, 2018, to February 1, 2019. Patients included those presenting with a skin lesion suspicious of malignancy who were referred to the urgent suspected skin cancer clinic (N = 5944) over 15 months. Patients who accepted and received a TBSE were subsequently included in the analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The proportion and rate of incidental skin cancer detection through TBSE and whether a clinically suspicious (malignant) index lesion was associated with a higher chance of having a malignant incidental lesion.

RESULTS

Of the 5944 patients referred to the clinic, 4726 individuals (79.5%) were evaluated. In the cohort included in the analyses, the median age was 57 years (interquartile range, 39-73 years); 2567 patients (54.3%) were women. A total of 1117 skin cancers were identified; of these, 242 lesions (21.7%) were detected incidentally through TBSE, including 197 of 570 (34.6%) basal cell carcinomas, 16 of 250 (6.4%) squamous cell carcinomas, and 25 of 215 (11.6%) melanomas. The detection rate of incidental malignant lesions was 5.1 lesions per 100 patients examined (5.1%; 95% CI, 4.5%-5.8%). There was a higher detection rate of histologically confirmed incidental malignant lesions in individuals with clinically suspicious index lesions requiring biopsy (10.9%; 95% CI, 9.5%-12.5%) compared with those presenting with clinically benign index lesions (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.6%-2.5%) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study support the use of TBSE for urgent skin cancer referrals, highlighting the potential harms of solitary lesion assessment in a subgroup. Individuals presenting with a clinically suspicious index lesion requiring biopsy are most likely to benefit from TBSE and should be counseled regarding the benefit.

Teledermatology: idea, benefits and risks of modern age - a systematic review based on melanoma

Telemedicine may be described as a modern technology supporting health care at a distance. Dermatology, as a visually-dependent specialty, is particularly suited for this kind of the health care model. This has been proven in a number of recent studies, which emphasized feasibility and reliability of teledermatology. Many patients in the world still do not have access to appropriate dermatological care, while skin cancers morbidity is on an upward trend. Technological development has enabled clinicians to care for diverse patient populations in need of skin expertise without increasing their overhead costs. Teledermatology has been used for various purposes: health care workers can use this technology to provide clinical services to patients, to monitor patient health, to consult with other health care providers and to provide patients with access to educational resources. It seems that teledermatology might be the answer to numerous issues concerning diagnosing, screening and managing cancers as well as pigmented skin lesions.

Role of community pharmacists in skin cancer screening: A descriptive study of skin cancer risk factors prevalence and photoprotection habits in Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain

Background:

Skin cancer incidence is increasing alarmingly, despite current efforts trying to improve its early detection. Community pharmacists have proven success in implementing screening protocols for a number of diseases because of their skills and easy access.

Objective:

To evaluate the prevalence of skin cancer risk factors and the photoprotection habits with a questionnaire in community pharmacy users.

Methods:

A research group consisting of pharmacists and dermatologists conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study to assess photoprotection habits and skin cancer risk factors by using a validated questionnaire in 218 community pharmacies in Barcelona from May 23^rd to June 13^th 2016. All participants received health education on photoprotection and skin cancer prevention. Patients with ≥1 skin cancer risk factor were referred to their physician, as they needed further screening of skin cancer.

Results:

A total of 5,530 participants were evaluated. Of those, only 20.2% participants had received a total body skin examination for skin cancer screening in the past by a physician and 57.1% reported using a SPF 50+ sunscreen. 53.9% participants presented ≥1 skin cancer risk factor: 11.8% participants reported having skin cancer familial history and 6.2% reported skin cancer personal history; pharmacists found ≥10 melanocytic nevi in 43.8% participants and chronically sun-damaged skin in 21.4%. Lesions suspicious for melanoma were reported in 10.9% of the participants and urgent dermatological evaluation was recommended.

Conclusions:

Pharmacists can detect people with skin cancer risk factors amongst their users. This intervention can be considered in multidisciplinary strategies of skin cancer screening.

Total body skin examination increases squamous cell carcinoma detection: a retrospective cohort study

Squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) have the potential for local tissue destruction and metastasis. The risk of complications increases if the lesion is not diagnosed and excised in a timely manner. Total body skin examination (TBSE) has been reported to increase melanoma detection; the objective of this study was to determine if it also increases SCC detection. Analysis of 469 SCCs diagnosed at a UK tertiary centre showed that 6.8% of these were detected incidentally and not from the index lesion that prompted referral. These incidentally detected SCCs tended to represent early disease, and therefore carried lower risk of complications. Our findings suggest that full skin checks may increase the number of SCCs detected, and at an earlier stage of disease. Therefore, we encourage the use of TBSE in all dermatology outpatient appointments, and make suggestions as to how to incorporate it into the limited time available in dermatology clinics.

Optimizing the total-body skin exam: An observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Total-body skin examinations (TBSEs) are commonly performed in clinical practice. There is limited research on best practices for performing a TBSE.

OBJECTIVE

To optimize the TBSE.

METHODS

We performed an observational cohort study by video recording 5 dermatology faculty and 5 residents conducting their regular TBSE on both a healthy male and female patient. Examination time, physician movements, patient movements, sequence of body parts examined, and body parts missed were analyzed by using an analytic hierarchy process matrix. Differences were evaluated by a t test of unequal variance. P values < .05 were deemed significant.

RESULTS

We identified an optimal format for conducting a TBSE that is efficient and accurate.

LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted with only standard healthy examiners and patients, rather than individuals with a variety of physical or mental disabilities. The structure of the study was not hypothesis driven, and we assumed that the engineers observing the physicians performing the examination would identify the most optimal TBSE.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that a standardized process of performing a TBSE minimizes the chance of missing a body area. This could also have implications on teaching a standardized TBSE to medical students, residents, and physicians.

Teledermatology Outcomes in the Providence Veterans Health Administration

Background: As technology evolves, so does the integration of technology into health care delivery. Telemedicine, the use of information technology to provide remote health care, aims to improve patient access to quality care across a wide range of barriers. Introduction: Our objective was to determine whether teleconsultation leverages specialist expertise at one site within the United States' largest integrated health system. We evaluated the Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center (PVAMC) teledermatology store-and-forward program. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 460 completed teleconsultations using retrospective chart review at the PVAMC in June-August 2016 for 12 postimaging outcomes, with no exclusion criteria. We determined outcomes using Computerized Patient Record System chart reviews. Results: Dermatologists completed 84-99% of all teleconsultations within 1 week after referral. Fifty one percent (51%) of patients required no dermatology clinic visit. Six percent (6%) of all teleconsultations were ultimately diagnosed with a biopsy-proven skin cancer. Sixty nine percent (69%) of referring providers prescribed recommended medications within 7 days. Discussion: We conclude that the PVAMC teledermatology program enables rapid access to dermatologic expertise while avoiding unnecessary clinic appointments. Conclusion: By detecting both weak links, and steps in the chain of care that successful teledermatology requires, our findings can help teledermatology systems within and outside the Veterans Affairs maximize their effectiveness.

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.

Teledermatology for diagnosing skin cancer in adults

BACKGROUND

Early accurate detection of all skin cancer types is essential to guide appropriate management and to improve morbidity and survival. Melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) are high-risk skin cancers which have the potential to metastasise and ultimately lead to death, whereas basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is usually localised with potential to infiltrate and damage surrounding tissue. Anxiety around missing early curable cases needs to be balanced against inappropriate referral and unnecessary excision of benign lesions. Teledermatology provides a way for generalist clinicians to access the opinion of a specialist dermatologist for skin lesions that they consider to be suspicious without referring the patients through the normal referral pathway. Teledermatology consultations can be 'store-and-forward' with electronic digital images of a lesion sent to a dermatologist for review at a later time, or can be live and interactive consultations using videoconferencing to connect the patient, referrer and dermatologist in real time.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of teledermatology for the detection of any skin cancer (melanoma, BCC or cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC)) in adults, and to compare its accuracy with that of in-person diagnosis.

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 evaluating skin cancer diagnosis for teledermatology alone, or in comparison with face-to-face diagnosis by a specialist clinician, compared with a reference standard of histological confirmation or clinical follow-up and expert opinion. We also included studies evaluating the referral accuracy of teledermatology compared with a reference standard of face-to-face diagnosis by a specialist clinician.

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 there were information related to the target condition of any skin cancer missing. Data permitting, we estimated summary sensitivities and specificities using the bivariate hierarchical model. Due to the scarcity of data, we undertook no covariate investigations for this review. For illustrative purposes, we plotted estimates of sensitivity and specificity on coupled forest plots for diagnostic threshold and target condition under consideration.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 22 studies reporting diagnostic accuracy data for 4057 lesions and 879 malignant cases (16 studies) and referral accuracy data for reported data for 1449 lesions and 270 'positive' cases as determined by the reference standard face-to-face decision (six studies). Methodological quality was variable with poor reporting hindering assessment. The overall risk of bias was high or unclear for participant selection, reference standard, and participant flow and timing in at least half of all studies; the majority were at low risk of bias for the index test. The applicability of study findings were of high or unclear concern for most studies in all domains assessed due to the recruitment of participants from secondary care settings or specialist clinics rather than from primary or community-based settings in which teledermatology is more likely to be used and due to the acquisition of lesion images by dermatologists or in specialist imaging units rather than by primary care clinicians.Seven studies provided data for the primary target condition of any skin cancer (1588 lesions and 638 malignancies). For the correct diagnosis of lesions as malignant using photographic images, summary sensitivity was 94.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90.1% to 97.4%) and summary specificity was 84.3% (95% CI 48.5% to 96.8%) (from four studies). Individual study estimates using dermoscopic images or a combination of photographic and dermoscopic images generally suggested similarly high sensitivities with highly variable specificities. Limited comparative data suggested similar diagnostic accuracy between teledermatology assessment and in-person diagnosis by a dermatologist; however, data were too scarce to draw firm conclusions. For the detection of invasive melanoma or atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants both sensitivities and specificities were more variable. Sensitivities ranged from 59% (95% CI 42% to 74%) to 100% (95% CI 48% to 100%) and specificities from 30% (95% CI 22% to 40%) to 100% (95% CI 93% to 100%), with reported diagnostic thresholds including the correct diagnosis of melanoma, classification of lesions as 'atypical' or 'typical, and the decision to refer or to excise a lesion.Referral accuracy data comparing teledermatology against a face-to-face reference standard suggested good agreement for lesions considered to require some positive action by face-to-face assessment (sensitivities of over 90%). For lesions considered of less concern when assessed face-to-face (e.g. for lesions not recommended for excision or referral), agreement was more variable with teledermatology specificities ranging from 57% (95% CI 39% to 73%) to 100% (95% CI 86% to 100%), suggesting that remote assessment is more likely recommend excision, referral or follow-up compared to in-person decisions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies were generally small and heterogeneous and methodological quality was difficult to judge due to poor reporting. Bearing in mind concerns regarding the applicability of study participants and of lesion image acquisition in specialist settings, our results suggest that teledermatology can correctly identify the majority of malignant lesions. Using a more widely defined threshold to identify 'possibly' malignant cases or lesions that should be considered for excision is likely to appropriately triage those lesions requiring face-to-face assessment by a specialist. Despite the increasing use of teledermatology on an international level, the evidence base to support its ability to accurately diagnose lesions and to triage lesions from primary to secondary care is lacking and further prospective and pragmatic evaluation is needed.

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.

Risk factors for development of new skin neoplasms in patients with past history of skin cancer: A survival analysis

We conducted a retrospective study aiming to assess the risk, and associated risk factors, of developing subsequent skin cancers after having a first diagnosis of skin cancer. We included all patients with biopsy-proven skin cancer attending a dermatology clinic between July 2007 and July 2017. We assessed the frequency of new skin cancers, as well as potential demographic and clinical factors significantly associated with occurrence of such neoplasms, that were identified by means of a survival analysis. We analyzed 969 patients with a total of 1584 skin neoplasms (1122 basal cell carcinomas (BCC), 310 squamous cell carcinomas (SCC), 143 melanomas and 9 other neoplasms). 165 patients (17.0%) developed subsequent skin neoplasms. Factors identified in multivariable models to be significantly associated with development of new skin cancers included older age (adjusted HR = 1.04 per year; 95%CI = 1.02-1.05; p < 0.001), and presence of synchronous neoplasms (adjusted HR = 2.25; 95%CI = 1.61-3.14; p < 0.001). Having a history of a BCC was significantly associated with development of new BCC (adjusted HR = 1.63; 95%CI = 1.05-2.54; p = 0.030), while having a previous SCC was associated with occurrence of subsequent SCC (adjusted HR = 3.60; 95%CI = 1.93-6.72; p < 0.001). These findings point to the importance of careful follow-up (e.g., skin self-examination and full body examination) of skin cancer patients.

Different outdoor professions have different risks - a cross-sectional study comparing non-melanoma skin cancer risk among farmers, gardeners and mountain guides

BACKGROUND

One of the main risk factors for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), the most common cancer worldwide, is solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR). This has led to the recognition of NMSC as occupational disease for outdoor workers in several countries. However, outdoor professions are a very heterogeneous group with diverse daily activities and associated UVR exposure.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the prevalence of NMSC and associated risk behaviour in different outdoor professions.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study among outdoor workers (farmers, gardeners, mountain guides) and indoor workers (office employees) as control group using a paper-based questionnaire on UVR exposure and protective behaviour followed by a skin examination by a dermatologist.

RESULTS

A total of 563 participants (46.9% women, 46.9 ± 13.8 years) consisting of 348 outdoor workers (38.8% farmer, 35.3% gardener, 25.9% mountain guides) and 215 indoor workers were included in the study between March and September 2017. NMSC incl. actinic keratosis was diagnosed in 33.3% of mountain guides, 27.4% of farmers, 19.5% of gardeners and in 5.6% of indoor workers. Significant differences were seen between the outdoor professions with mountain guides at highest risk compared to farmers (OR = 2.6, 95% CI = 1.2-5.7). Substantial differences between the professions were also seen in skin cancer screening attendance rates (indoor worker 61.4%, mountain guides 57.8%, farmers 31.9%, gardeners 27.6%), daily UVR exposure during work and protective behaviour such as sunscreen use during work.

CONCLUSION

Different outdoor professions have significant different risks for NMSC and show different risk behaviour. Tailoring prevention efforts to different professions based on their individual needs could be the key to lower the global burden of (occupational) NMSC.

The role of patient education and physician support in self-efficacy for skin self-examination among patients with melanoma

OBJECTIVE

This project aims to elucidate the relationships between skin self-examination (SSE), perceived physician support of SSE, and self-efficacy for SSE among melanoma patients.

METHODS

A longitudinal study of patients diagnosed with melanoma was conducted over the span of 18 months. Participants filled out questionnaires at four assessment points and participated in an SSE education about the early signs of melanoma.

RESULTS

Among the 242 patients enrolled, the level of self-efficacy for SSE was 23% higher immediately after the educational intervention (p<.001) and the increase was retained three months (p<.001) and twelve months later (p<.001). Additionally, a one-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed that the perceived physician support of SSE positively corresponded to the level of patient self-efficacy with higher patient-reported physician support being related to higher self-efficacy (p=.001).

CONCLUSION

Patient education and perceived physician support of SSE are positively associated with patients' level of self-efficacy.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians caring for melanoma survivors should be aware that, both SSE education and patients' perception of high physician support of SSE may be associated with higher self-efficacy for checking one's own skin for signs of cancer recurrence.

Incidence of melanoma and keratinocytic carcinomas in patients evaluated by store-and-forward teledermatology vs. dermatology clinic

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether incidence of detected skin cancer in patients evaluated by store-and-forward teledermatology (SAF) vs. face-to-face consultation (F2F) significantly differs, and whether such differences are because of variations in patient demographics, diagnostic accuracy, or both.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study compares patient skin cancer risk profile, pre-post biopsy diagnostic accuracy, and detection rates of any skin cancer, melanoma, and keratinocytic carcinoma between all SAF teledermatology patients and a subset of randomly selected F2F consultations at VA-Boston Healthcare System in 2014.

RESULTS

Patients in the teledermatology (n = 434) and F2F visit cohorts (n = 587) had similar baseline demographics except a higher proportion of F2F patients had prior history of skin cancer, 22% (131/587) vs. 10% (45/434), P < 0.001, and received biopsies, 27.2% (160/587) vs. 11.5% (50/434), P < 0.001. When adjusted for age, immunosuppression, and personal and family history of skin cancer, there were no significant differences between the two cohorts in detection rates for any skin cancer (9.5% vs. 5.8%, P = 0.3), melanoma (0.6% vs. 0%, P = N/A), or keratinocytic carcinoma (8.5% vs. 5.5%, P = 0.7). The two cohorts also had similar pre-post biopsy perfect diagnostic concordance, time from initial consult request to biopsy (45.5 d vs. 47.3 d, P = 0.8), and time from biopsy to definitive treatment (67.5 d vs. 65.4 d, P = 0.8).

CONCLUSION

F2F patients were more likely to have prior history of skin cancer and receive biopsies. When adjusted for presence of skin cancer risk factors, incidence of detected melanoma, keratinocytic carcinoma, and any skin cancer was similar between SAF teledermatology and F2F patients.

A Fast-Track Referral System for Skin Lesions Suspicious of Melanoma: Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study from a Plastic Surgery Center

Introduction. To minimize delay between presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of cutaneous melanoma (CM), a national fast-track referral system (FTRS) was implemented in Denmark. The aim of this study was to analyze the referral patterns to our department of skin lesions suspicious of melanoma in the FTRS. Methods. Patients referred to the Department of Plastic Surgery and Breast Surgery in Zealand University Hospital were registered prospectively over a 1-year period in 2014. A cross-sectional study was performed analyzing referral patterns, including patient and tumor characteristics. Results. A total of 556 patients were registered as referred to the center in the FTRS for skin lesions suspicious of melanoma. Among these, a total of 312 patients (56.1%) were diagnosed with CM. Additionally, 41 (7.4%) of the referred patients were diagnosed with in situ melanoma. Conclusion. In total, 353 (63.5%) patients had a malignant or premalignant melanocytic skin lesion. When only considering patients who where referred without a biopsy, the diagnostic accuracy for GPs and dermatologists was 29% and 45%, respectively. We suggest that efforts of adequate training for the referring physicians in diagnosing melanocytic skin lesions will increase diagnostic accuracy, leading to larger capacity in secondary care for the required treatment of malignant skin lesions.

A pilot trial of mobile, patient-performed teledermoscopy

BACKGROUND

Early detection by skin self-examination (SSE) could improve outcomes for melanoma. Mobile teledermoscopy may aid this process.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the clinical accuracy of SSE plus mobile teledermoscopy vs. clinical skin examination (CSE) and to test whether providing people with detailed SSE instructions improves accuracy.

METHODS

Men and women aged 50-64 years (n = 58) performed SSE plus mobile teledermoscopy in their homes between May and November 2013 and were given technical instructions plus detailed SSE instructions (intervention) or technical instructions only (control). Within 3 months, they underwent a CSE. Outcome measures included (i) body sites examined, lesions photographed, and missed; (ii) sensitivity of SSE plus mobile teledermoscopy vs. in-person CSE using either patients or lesions as denominator; and (iii) concordance of telediagnosis with CSE.

RESULTS

Overall 49 of 58 randomized participants completed the study, and submitted 309 lesions to the teledermatologist. Intervention-group participants were more likely to submit lesions from their legs compared with controls (P = 0·03), with no other differences. Eleven participants (22%) did not photograph 14 pigmented lesions that the dermatologist considered worthwhile photographing or monitoring. The sensitivity of SSE plus mobile teledermoscopy was 82% using the patient as denominator and 42% using the lesion as denominator. There was substantial agreement between telediagnosis and CSE (κ = 0·90), accounting for differential diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

SSE plus mobile teledermoscopy is promising for surveillance of particular lesions even without detailed SSE instructions. However, in the format tested in this study, consumers may overlook lesions and send many nonpigmented lesions. This investigation demonstrates that high-quality dermoscopic images can be taken by patients at home with high accuracy.

Clinical performance of the Nevisense system in cutaneous melanoma detection: an international, multicentre, prospective and blinded clinical trial on efficacy and safety

BACKGROUND

Even though progress has been made, the detection of melanoma still poses a challenge. In light of this situation, the Nevisense electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) system (SciBase AB, Stockholm, Sweden) was designed and shown to have the potential to be used as an adjunct diagnostic tool for melanoma detection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of the Nevisense system in the distinction of benign lesions of the skin from melanoma with electrical impedance spectroscopy.

METHODS

This multicentre, prospective, and blinded clinical study was conducted at five American and 17 European investigational sites. All eligible skin lesions in the study were examined with the EIS-based Nevisense system, photographed, removed by excisional biopsy and subjected to histopathological evaluation. A postprocedure clinical follow-up was conducted at 7 ± 3 days from the initial measurement. A total of 1951 patients with 2416 lesions were enrolled into the study; 1943 lesions were eligible and evaluable for the primary efficacy end point, including 265 melanomas - 112 in situ and 153 invasive melanomas with a median Breslow thickness of 0·57 mm [48 basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) and seven squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs)].

RESULTS

The observed sensitivity of Nevisense was 96·6% (256 of 265 melanomas) with an exact one-sided 95% lower confidence bound estimated at 94·2% and an observed specificity of 34·4%, and an exact two-sided 95% confidence bound estimated at 32·0-36·9%. The positive and negative predictive values of Nevisense were 21·1% and 98·2%, respectively. The observed sensitivity for nonmelanoma skin cancer was 100% (55 of 48 BCCs and seven SCCs) with an exact two-sided 95% confidence bound estimated at 93·5-100·0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Nevisense is an accurate and safe device to support clinicians in the detection of cutaneous melanoma.