Remote cutaneous confocal microscopy: A multicentric prospective study evaluating diagnostic accuracy for melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in tertiary settings

Cutaneous confocal microscopy (CCM) facilitates in vivo visualization of skin at a cellular level. Use of a “store and forward” approach for remote-CCM interpretation (remote-CCM) across multiple sites has not been tested and may increase access to noninvasive diagnosis. To test the diagnostic accur...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 2024-10
Hauptverfasser: Ho, Genevieve, Collgros, Helena, Sinz, Christoph, Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna, Gallo, Bruna, Chew, Christopher Y., Ip, Ken, Koutsis, James, Lo, Serigne N., Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo, Herbert Chan, Hsien, Ferguson, Peter, Gribbin, Hannah, Mar, Victoria, Soyer, Hans Peter, Martin, Linda K., Smith, Andrea L., Cust, Anne E., Guitera, Pascale
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
container_volume
creator Ho, Genevieve
Collgros, Helena
Sinz, Christoph
Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna
Gallo, Bruna
Chew, Christopher Y.
Ip, Ken
Koutsis, James
Lo, Serigne N.
Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo
Herbert Chan, Hsien
Ferguson, Peter
Gribbin, Hannah
Mar, Victoria
Soyer, Hans Peter
Martin, Linda K.
Smith, Andrea L.
Cust, Anne E.
Guitera, Pascale
description Cutaneous confocal microscopy (CCM) facilitates in vivo visualization of skin at a cellular level. Use of a “store and forward” approach for remote-CCM interpretation (remote-CCM) across multiple sites has not been tested and may increase access to noninvasive diagnosis. To test the diagnostic accuracy and safety of remote-CCM. We prospectively recruited lesions selected for biopsy for skin malignancy across 5 Australian tertiary dermatology centers. CCM, clinical and dermatoscopy images were acquired prebiopsy and accessed by a cloud-based platform for interpretation by CCM readers. CCM diagnosis was compared with histopathology results. Among the 201 lesions included, melanoma was the most common malignancy (34/72, 47.2%). Of the 89 lesions (44.8%) potentially “saved” from biopsy, 80 (90%) were truly benign lesions and 9 (10.1%) were missed malignant lesions of melanoma in situ (n = 7) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (n = 2). No invasive melanomas were missed. Sensitivity of remote-CCM for detection of malignancy was 89% (95% CI, 79%-95%) and specificity was 64% (95% CI, 55%-73%). The study recruited from high-risk populations and excluded lesions that were not biopsied. Remote-CCM has comparable accuracy to bedside CCM and safely reduces unnecessary biopsies. Potential SCCs are not appropriate for remote-CCM. Follow-up of borderline melanocytic lesions is recommended.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.09.051
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3115500650</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0190962224029566</els_id><sourcerecordid>3115500650</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1961-7a9ee084b1d3fb9ad7922a089ed15387b1f85db3af1cab49f7b57fe4319d6d853</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcuO1DAQRS0EYpqBH2CBvGSTYMd5GbEZjXhJIyEhWFsVuzxyk9iN7bSU3-FLceiBJata1KlbVfcS8pKzmjPevznWRwBTN6xpayZr1vFH5MCZHKp-GIfH5MC4ZJXsm-aKPEvpyBiTrRiekishxSjbpjuQX19xCRmpXjN4DGuiOngbNMx0cTqGpMNpe0tv6LLO2Wn0OTpNT6VxQp3dGWnKq9konmFeITt_T42Dex9SoSlovUbQG7Uh0gVn8GEBCt7QHxh3OuhtXw5Ruz8t52nGmB3EjSbMu156Tp5YmBO-eKjX5PuH999uP1V3Xz5-vr25qzSXPa8GkIhsbCduhJ0kmEE2DbBRouGdGIeJ27EzkwDLNUyttMPUDRZbwaXpzdiJa_L6olu--7liympxSeM8X4xRgvOuY6zvWEGbC7o7lCJadYpuKUcrztSejTqqPRu1Z6OYVCWbMvTqQX-dFjT_Rv6GUYB3FwDLl2eHUSXt0Gs0LhazlQnuf_q_Aa4apaM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3115500650</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Remote cutaneous confocal microscopy: A multicentric prospective study evaluating diagnostic accuracy for melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in tertiary settings</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Ho, Genevieve ; Collgros, Helena ; Sinz, Christoph ; Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna ; Gallo, Bruna ; Chew, Christopher Y. ; Ip, Ken ; Koutsis, James ; Lo, Serigne N. ; Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo ; Herbert Chan, Hsien ; Ferguson, Peter ; Gribbin, Hannah ; Mar, Victoria ; Soyer, Hans Peter ; Martin, Linda K. ; Smith, Andrea L. ; Cust, Anne E. ; Guitera, Pascale</creator><creatorcontrib>Ho, Genevieve ; Collgros, Helena ; Sinz, Christoph ; Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna ; Gallo, Bruna ; Chew, Christopher Y. ; Ip, Ken ; Koutsis, James ; Lo, Serigne N. ; Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo ; Herbert Chan, Hsien ; Ferguson, Peter ; Gribbin, Hannah ; Mar, Victoria ; Soyer, Hans Peter ; Martin, Linda K. ; Smith, Andrea L. ; Cust, Anne E. ; Guitera, Pascale</creatorcontrib><description>Cutaneous confocal microscopy (CCM) facilitates in vivo visualization of skin at a cellular level. Use of a “store and forward” approach for remote-CCM interpretation (remote-CCM) across multiple sites has not been tested and may increase access to noninvasive diagnosis. To test the diagnostic accuracy and safety of remote-CCM. We prospectively recruited lesions selected for biopsy for skin malignancy across 5 Australian tertiary dermatology centers. CCM, clinical and dermatoscopy images were acquired prebiopsy and accessed by a cloud-based platform for interpretation by CCM readers. CCM diagnosis was compared with histopathology results. Among the 201 lesions included, melanoma was the most common malignancy (34/72, 47.2%). Of the 89 lesions (44.8%) potentially “saved” from biopsy, 80 (90%) were truly benign lesions and 9 (10.1%) were missed malignant lesions of melanoma in situ (n = 7) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (n = 2). No invasive melanomas were missed. Sensitivity of remote-CCM for detection of malignancy was 89% (95% CI, 79%-95%) and specificity was 64% (95% CI, 55%-73%). The study recruited from high-risk populations and excluded lesions that were not biopsied. Remote-CCM has comparable accuracy to bedside CCM and safely reduces unnecessary biopsies. Potential SCCs are not appropriate for remote-CCM. Follow-up of borderline melanocytic lesions is recommended.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0190-9622</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1097-6787</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6787</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.09.051</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39389425</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>cutaneous confocal microscopy ; cutaneous imaging ; cutaneous oncology ; diagnostic accuracy ; melanoma ; nonmelanoma skin cancer ; reflectance confocal microscopy ; teledermatology</subject><ispartof>Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2024-10</ispartof><rights>2024 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1961-7a9ee084b1d3fb9ad7922a089ed15387b1f85db3af1cab49f7b57fe4319d6d853</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3769-8951</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2024.09.051$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39389425$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ho, Genevieve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collgros, Helena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinz, Christoph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallo, Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chew, Christopher Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ip, Ken</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koutsis, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lo, Serigne N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herbert Chan, Hsien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferguson, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gribbin, Hannah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mar, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soyer, Hans Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Linda K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Andrea L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cust, Anne E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guitera, Pascale</creatorcontrib><title>Remote cutaneous confocal microscopy: A multicentric prospective study evaluating diagnostic accuracy for melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in tertiary settings</title><title>Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology</title><addtitle>J Am Acad Dermatol</addtitle><description>Cutaneous confocal microscopy (CCM) facilitates in vivo visualization of skin at a cellular level. Use of a “store and forward” approach for remote-CCM interpretation (remote-CCM) across multiple sites has not been tested and may increase access to noninvasive diagnosis. To test the diagnostic accuracy and safety of remote-CCM. We prospectively recruited lesions selected for biopsy for skin malignancy across 5 Australian tertiary dermatology centers. CCM, clinical and dermatoscopy images were acquired prebiopsy and accessed by a cloud-based platform for interpretation by CCM readers. CCM diagnosis was compared with histopathology results. Among the 201 lesions included, melanoma was the most common malignancy (34/72, 47.2%). Of the 89 lesions (44.8%) potentially “saved” from biopsy, 80 (90%) were truly benign lesions and 9 (10.1%) were missed malignant lesions of melanoma in situ (n = 7) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (n = 2). No invasive melanomas were missed. Sensitivity of remote-CCM for detection of malignancy was 89% (95% CI, 79%-95%) and specificity was 64% (95% CI, 55%-73%). The study recruited from high-risk populations and excluded lesions that were not biopsied. Remote-CCM has comparable accuracy to bedside CCM and safely reduces unnecessary biopsies. Potential SCCs are not appropriate for remote-CCM. Follow-up of borderline melanocytic lesions is recommended.</description><subject>cutaneous confocal microscopy</subject><subject>cutaneous imaging</subject><subject>cutaneous oncology</subject><subject>diagnostic accuracy</subject><subject>melanoma</subject><subject>nonmelanoma skin cancer</subject><subject>reflectance confocal microscopy</subject><subject>teledermatology</subject><issn>0190-9622</issn><issn>1097-6787</issn><issn>1097-6787</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kcuO1DAQRS0EYpqBH2CBvGSTYMd5GbEZjXhJIyEhWFsVuzxyk9iN7bSU3-FLceiBJata1KlbVfcS8pKzmjPevznWRwBTN6xpayZr1vFH5MCZHKp-GIfH5MC4ZJXsm-aKPEvpyBiTrRiekishxSjbpjuQX19xCRmpXjN4DGuiOngbNMx0cTqGpMNpe0tv6LLO2Wn0OTpNT6VxQp3dGWnKq9konmFeITt_T42Dex9SoSlovUbQG7Uh0gVn8GEBCt7QHxh3OuhtXw5Ruz8t52nGmB3EjSbMu156Tp5YmBO-eKjX5PuH999uP1V3Xz5-vr25qzSXPa8GkIhsbCduhJ0kmEE2DbBRouGdGIeJ27EzkwDLNUyttMPUDRZbwaXpzdiJa_L6olu--7liympxSeM8X4xRgvOuY6zvWEGbC7o7lCJadYpuKUcrztSejTqqPRu1Z6OYVCWbMvTqQX-dFjT_Rv6GUYB3FwDLl2eHUSXt0Gs0LhazlQnuf_q_Aa4apaM</recordid><startdate>20241009</startdate><enddate>20241009</enddate><creator>Ho, Genevieve</creator><creator>Collgros, Helena</creator><creator>Sinz, Christoph</creator><creator>Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna</creator><creator>Gallo, Bruna</creator><creator>Chew, Christopher Y.</creator><creator>Ip, Ken</creator><creator>Koutsis, James</creator><creator>Lo, Serigne N.</creator><creator>Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo</creator><creator>Herbert Chan, Hsien</creator><creator>Ferguson, Peter</creator><creator>Gribbin, Hannah</creator><creator>Mar, Victoria</creator><creator>Soyer, Hans Peter</creator><creator>Martin, Linda K.</creator><creator>Smith, Andrea L.</creator><creator>Cust, Anne E.</creator><creator>Guitera, Pascale</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3769-8951</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241009</creationdate><title>Remote cutaneous confocal microscopy: A multicentric prospective study evaluating diagnostic accuracy for melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in tertiary settings</title><author>Ho, Genevieve ; Collgros, Helena ; Sinz, Christoph ; Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna ; Gallo, Bruna ; Chew, Christopher Y. ; Ip, Ken ; Koutsis, James ; Lo, Serigne N. ; Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo ; Herbert Chan, Hsien ; Ferguson, Peter ; Gribbin, Hannah ; Mar, Victoria ; Soyer, Hans Peter ; Martin, Linda K. ; Smith, Andrea L. ; Cust, Anne E. ; Guitera, Pascale</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1961-7a9ee084b1d3fb9ad7922a089ed15387b1f85db3af1cab49f7b57fe4319d6d853</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>cutaneous confocal microscopy</topic><topic>cutaneous imaging</topic><topic>cutaneous oncology</topic><topic>diagnostic accuracy</topic><topic>melanoma</topic><topic>nonmelanoma skin cancer</topic><topic>reflectance confocal microscopy</topic><topic>teledermatology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ho, Genevieve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collgros, Helena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinz, Christoph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallo, Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chew, Christopher Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ip, Ken</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koutsis, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lo, Serigne N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herbert Chan, Hsien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferguson, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gribbin, Hannah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mar, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soyer, Hans Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Linda K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Andrea L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cust, Anne E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guitera, Pascale</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ho, Genevieve</au><au>Collgros, Helena</au><au>Sinz, Christoph</au><au>Melhoranse-Gouveia, Bruna</au><au>Gallo, Bruna</au><au>Chew, Christopher Y.</au><au>Ip, Ken</au><au>Koutsis, James</au><au>Lo, Serigne N.</au><au>Schwartz-Aldea, Rodrigo</au><au>Herbert Chan, Hsien</au><au>Ferguson, Peter</au><au>Gribbin, Hannah</au><au>Mar, Victoria</au><au>Soyer, Hans Peter</au><au>Martin, Linda K.</au><au>Smith, Andrea L.</au><au>Cust, Anne E.</au><au>Guitera, Pascale</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Remote cutaneous confocal microscopy: A multicentric prospective study evaluating diagnostic accuracy for melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in tertiary settings</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology</jtitle><addtitle>J Am Acad Dermatol</addtitle><date>2024-10-09</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>0190-9622</issn><issn>1097-6787</issn><eissn>1097-6787</eissn><abstract>Cutaneous confocal microscopy (CCM) facilitates in vivo visualization of skin at a cellular level. Use of a “store and forward” approach for remote-CCM interpretation (remote-CCM) across multiple sites has not been tested and may increase access to noninvasive diagnosis. To test the diagnostic accuracy and safety of remote-CCM. We prospectively recruited lesions selected for biopsy for skin malignancy across 5 Australian tertiary dermatology centers. CCM, clinical and dermatoscopy images were acquired prebiopsy and accessed by a cloud-based platform for interpretation by CCM readers. CCM diagnosis was compared with histopathology results. Among the 201 lesions included, melanoma was the most common malignancy (34/72, 47.2%). Of the 89 lesions (44.8%) potentially “saved” from biopsy, 80 (90%) were truly benign lesions and 9 (10.1%) were missed malignant lesions of melanoma in situ (n = 7) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (n = 2). No invasive melanomas were missed. Sensitivity of remote-CCM for detection of malignancy was 89% (95% CI, 79%-95%) and specificity was 64% (95% CI, 55%-73%). The study recruited from high-risk populations and excluded lesions that were not biopsied. Remote-CCM has comparable accuracy to bedside CCM and safely reduces unnecessary biopsies. Potential SCCs are not appropriate for remote-CCM. Follow-up of borderline melanocytic lesions is recommended.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39389425</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jaad.2024.09.051</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3769-8951</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0190-9622
ispartof Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2024-10
issn 0190-9622
1097-6787
1097-6787
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3115500650
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects cutaneous confocal microscopy
cutaneous imaging
cutaneous oncology
diagnostic accuracy
melanoma
nonmelanoma skin cancer
reflectance confocal microscopy
teledermatology
title Remote cutaneous confocal microscopy: A multicentric prospective study evaluating diagnostic accuracy for melanoma and keratinocyte carcinoma in tertiary settings
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T20%3A52%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Remote%20cutaneous%20confocal%20microscopy:%20A%20multicentric%20prospective%20study%20evaluating%20diagnostic%20accuracy%20for%20melanoma%20and%20keratinocyte%20carcinoma%20in%20tertiary%20settings&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20American%20Academy%20of%20Dermatology&rft.au=Ho,%20Genevieve&rft.date=2024-10-09&rft.issn=0190-9622&rft.eissn=1097-6787&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jaad.2024.09.051&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3115500650%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3115500650&rft_id=info:pmid/39389425&rft_els_id=S0190962224029566&rfr_iscdi=true