Non-Invasive Diagnostic Technologies for Melanoma

Authors

  • Michael Copley, MD, PhD, FRCPC

Abstract

Clinical examination followed by excisional biopsy and histopathologic analysis of suspicious pigmented lesions remains the gold-standard for melanoma diagnosis. Unfortunately, the performance of the unaided “melanoma detection pathway” is far from optimal with dermatologists demonstrating only 63.6% sensitivity and primary care physicians only 40.2% sensitivity for correct melanoma identification in a community-based screening setting. The accuracy of unaided melanoma detection is also low with a number needed to excise (NNE), defined as the number of suspicious lesions that must be excised to detect a single melanoma, of 29.4 for non-specialists and 8.7 for specialists. In order to improve melanoma detection, new non-invasive techniques have emerged including dermoscopy, total body photography, reflectance confocal microscopy and the pigmented lesion assay, which have a potential capacity to improve melanoma diagnosis. Such techniques used either alone, in combination, or with computational approaches including artificial intelligence (AI), have the potential to revolutionize the melanoma detection pathway for the benefit of patients and clinicians alike. Some of these technologies also provide an alternative to surgical biopsy in cases where patients decline such a procedure or to aid in the decision of whether to proceed with surgical biopsy when the clinical findings are equivocal. Such techniques also have application in the assessment and monitoring of high-risk patients including those with a history of melanoma, with multiple atypical nevi or with melanoma predisposition syndromes. They may also improve triage of referrals from non-specialists and help reduce healthcare costs by decreasing unnecessary surgical biopsies. In this review, the key features of established and emerging visual and non-visual non-invasive melanoma diagnostic technologies are highlighted. 

Author Biography

Michael Copley, MD, PhD, FRCPC

Dr. Michael Copley is a medical dermatologist with dual board-certification in Canada and the United States. He also holds a PhD in Experimental Medicine from the University of British Columbia (UBC) and maintains a keen interest in both clinical and basic research. As a clinical instructor within UBC’s Department of Dermatology and Skin Science, he is passionate about both undergraduate and graduate level dermatology education. His clinical interests include skin cancer, autoimmune diseases of the skin and telemedicine.

References

Fritschi L, Dye SA, Katris P. Validity of melanoma diagnosis in a community-based screening program. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;164(4):385-90.

Aitken JF, Janda M, Elwood M, Youl PH, Ring IT, Lowe JB. Clinical outcomes from skin screening clinics within a community-based melanoma screening program. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006;54(1):105-14.

Argenziano G, Cerroni L, Zalaudek I, Staibano S, Hofmann-Wellenhof R, Arpaia N, et al. Accuracy in melanoma detection: a 10-year multicenter survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67(1):54-9.

Pehamberger H, Steiner A, Wolff K. In vivo epiluminescence microscopy of pigmented skin lesions. I. Pattern analysis of pigmented skin lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1987;17(4):571-83.

Nachbar F, Stolz W, Merkle T, Cognetta AB, Vogt T, Landthaler M, et al. The ABCD rule of dermatoscopy. High prospective value in the diagnosis of doubtful melanocytic skin lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1994;30(4):551-9.

Argenziano G, Fabbrocini G, Carli P, De Giorgi V, Sammarco E, Delfino M. Epiluminescence microscopy for the diagnosis of doubtful melanocytic skin lesions. Comparison of the ABCD rule of dermatoscopy and a new 7-point checklist based on pattern analysis. Arch Dermatol. 1998;134(12):1563-70.

Menzies S. An Atlas of Surface Microscopy of Pigmented Skin Lesions: Dermoscopy. McGraw Hill Professional. 2003.

Henning JS, Dusza SW, Wang SQ, Marghoob AA, Rabinovitz HS, Polsky D, et al. The CASH (color, architecture, symmetry, and homogeneity) algorithm for dermoscopy. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;56(1):45-52.

Rosendahl C, Tschandl P, Cameron A, Kittler H. Diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy for melanocytic and nonmelanocytic pigmented lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;64(6):1068-73.

Carrera C, Marchetti MA, Dusza SW, Argenziano G, Braun RP, Halpern AC, et al. Validity and Reliability of Dermoscopic Criteria Used to Differentiate Nevi From Melanoma: A Web-Based International Dermoscopy Society Study. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(7):798-806.

Carli P, Quercioli E, Sestini S, Stante M, Ricci L, Brunasso G, et al. Pattern analysis not simplified algorithms is the most reliable method for teaching dermoscopy for melanoma diagnosis to residents in dermatology. Br J Dermatol. 2003;148(5):981-4.

Dinnes J, Deeks JJ, Chuchu N, Ferrante di Ruffano L, Matin RN, Thomson DR, et al. Dermoscopy with and without visual inspectio for diagnosing melanoma in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;12:CD011902.

Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M. Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. Lancet Oncol. 2002;3(3):159-65.

Bafounta ML, Beauchet A, Aegerter P, Saiag P. Is dermoscopy (epiluminescence microscopy) useful for the diagnosis of melanoma? Results of a meta-analysis using techniques adapted to the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Arch Dermatol. 2001;137(10):1343-50.

Vestergaard ME, Macaskill P, Holt PE, Menzies SW. Dermoscopy compared with naked eye examination for the diagnosis of primary melanoma: a meta-analysis of studies performed in a clinical setting. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159(3):669-76.

Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M. Follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions with digital epiluminescence microscopy: patterns of modifications observed in early melanoma, atypical nevi, and common nevi. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2000;43(3):467-76.

Haenssle HA, Korpas B, Hansen-Hagge C, Buhl T, Kaune KM, Johnsen S, et al. Selection of patients for long-term surveillance with digital dermoscopy by assessment of melanoma risk factors. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146(3):257-64.

Argenziano G, Mordente I, Ferrara G, Sgambato A, Annese P, Zalaudek I. Dermoscopic monitoring of melanocytic skin lesions: clinical outcome and patient compliance vary according to follow-up protocols. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159(2):331-6.

Schiffner R, Schiffner-Rohe J, Landthaler M, Stolz W. Long-term dermoscopic follow-up of melanocytic naevi: clinical outcome and patient compliance. Br J Dermatol. 2003;149(1):79-86.

Rinner C, Tschandl P, Sinz C, Kittler H. Long-term evaluation of the efficacy of digital dermatoscopy monitoring at a tertiary referral center. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2017;15(5):517-22.

Tschandl P. Sequential digital dermatoscopic imaging of patients with multiple atypical nevi. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8(3):231-7.

Salerni G, Carrera C, Lovatto L, Marti- Laborda RM, Isern G, Palou J, et al. Characterization of 1152 lesions excised over 10 years using total-body photography and digital dermatoscopy in the surveillance of patients at high risk for melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67(5):836-45.

Terushkin V, Oliveria SA, Marghoob AA, Halpern AC. Use of and beliefs about total body photography and dermatoscopy among US dermatology training programs: an update. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;62(5):794-803.

Lallas A, Apalla Z, Kyrgidis A, Papageorgiou C, Boukovinas I, Bobos M, et al. Second primary melanomas in a cohort of 977 melanoma patients within the first 5 years of monitoring. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(2):398-406.

Truong A, Strazzulla L, March J, Boucher KM, Nelson KC, Kim CC, et al. Reduction in nevus biopsies in patients monitored by total body photography. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75(1):135-43 e5.

Goodson AG, Florell SR, Hyde M, Bowen GM, Grossman D. Comparative analysis of total body and dermatoscopic photographic monitoring of nevi in similar patient populations at risk for cutaneous melanoma. Dermatol Surg. 2010;36(7):1087-98.

Risser J, Pressley Z, Veledar E, Washington C, Chen SC. The impact of total body photography on biopsy rate in patients from a pigmented lesion clinic. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;57(3):428-34.

Moye MS, King SM, Rice ZP, DeLong LK, Seidler AM, Veledar E, et al. Effects of total-body digital photography on cancer worry in patients with atypical mole syndrome. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151(2):137-43.

Waddell A, Star P, Guitera P. Advances in the use of reflectance confocal microscopy in melanoma. Melanoma Manag. 2018;5(1):MMT04.

Pellacani G, Pepe P, Casari A, Longo C. Reflectance confocal microscopy as a second-level examination in skin oncology improves diagnostic accuracy and saves unnecessary excisions: a longitudinal prospective study. Br J Dermatol. 2014;171(5):1044-51.

Gerami P, Yao Z, Polsky D, Jansen B, Busam K, Ho J, et al. Development and validation of a noninvasive 2-gene molecular assay for cutaneous melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(1):114-20 e2.

Ferris L, Moy R, Gerami P, Sligh JE, Jansen B,Yao Z, Cockerell C. Real-world experience and clinical utility of a non-invasive gene expression test for primary cutaneous melanoma and validation against high risk driver muations in BRAF, NRAS and the TERT promoter. International Society for Investigative Dermatology Meeting. Late Breaking Abstract. 2018 May 16-19; Orlando, FL2018.

Beatson M, Weinstock MA. Further Consideration of the Pigmented Lesion Assay. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155(3):393.

Fried L, Tan A, Bajaj S, Liebman TN, Polsky D, Stein JA. Technological advances for the detection of melanoma: Advances in molecular techniques. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83(4):996-1004.

Fried L, Tan A, Bajaj S, Liebman TN, Polsky D, Stein JA. Technological advances for the detection of melanoma: Advances in diagnostic techniques. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83(4):983-92.

Published

2021-12-01

How to Cite

1.
Copley M. Non-Invasive Diagnostic Technologies for Melanoma. Can Dermatol Today [Internet]. 2021 Dec. 1 [cited 2024 Nov. 23];2(4):8–1`1. Available from: https://canadiandermatologytoday.com/article/view/2-4-Copley

Issue

Section

Articles