Effect of Reflectance Confocal Microscopy for Suspect Lesions on Diagnostic Accuracy in Melanoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Giovanni Pellacani, Francesca Farnetani, Silvana Ciardo, Johanna Chester, Shaniko Kaleci, Laura Mazzoni, Sara Bassoli, Alice Casari, Riccardo Pampena, Marica Mirra, Michela Lai, Serena Magi, Victor D Mandel, Sergio Di Matteo, Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo, Ignazio Stanganelli, Caterina Longo, Giovanni Pellacani, Francesca Farnetani, Silvana Ciardo, Johanna Chester, Shaniko Kaleci, Laura Mazzoni, Sara Bassoli, Alice Casari, Riccardo Pampena, Marica Mirra, Michela Lai, Serena Magi, Victor D Mandel, Sergio Di Matteo, Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo, Ignazio Stanganelli, Caterina Longo

Abstract

Importance: Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have concluded that given data paucity, a comparison of reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) with dermoscopy is complex. They recommend comparative prospective studies in a real-world setting of suspect lesions.

Objective: To test the hypothesis that RCM reduces unnecessary lesion excision by more than 30% and identifies all melanoma lesions thicker than 0.5 mm at baseline.

Design, setting, and participants: This randomized clinical trial included 3165 patients enrolled from 3 dermatology referral centers in Italy between January 2017 and December 2019, with a mean (SD) follow-up of 9.6 (6.9) months (range, 1.9-37.0 months). The consecutive sample of 3165 suspect lesions determined through dermoscopy were eligible for inclusion (10 patients refused). Diagnostic analysis included 3078 patients (48 lost, 39 refused excision). Data were analyzed between April and September 2021.

Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to standard therapeutic care (clinical and dermoscopy evaluation) with or without adjunctive RCM. Information available guided prospective clinical decision-making (excision or follow-up).

Main outcomes and measures: Hypotheses were defined prior to study initiation. All lesions excised (baseline and follow-up) were registered, including histopathological diagnoses/no change at dermoscopy follow-up (with or without adjunctive RCM). Number needed to excise (total number of excised lesions/number of melanomas) and Breslow thickness of delayed diagnosed melanomas were calculated based on real-life, prospective, clinical decision-making.

Results: Among the 3165 participants, 1608 (50.8%) were male, and mean (SD) age was 49.3 (14.9) years. When compared with standard therapeutic care only, adjunctive RCM was associated with a higher positive predictive value (18.9 vs 33.3), lower benign to malignant ratio (3.7:1.0 vs 1.8:1.0), and a number needed to excise reduction of 43.4% (5.3 vs 3.0). All lesions (n = 15) with delayed melanoma diagnoses were thinner than 0.5 mm.

Conclusions and relevance: This randomized clinical trial shows that adjunctive use of RCM for suspect lesions reduces unnecessary excisions and assures the removal of aggressive melanomas at baseline in a real-life, clinical decision-making application for referral centers with RCM.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04789421.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure.. CONSORT Flow Diagram
Figure.. CONSORT Flow Diagram

References

    1. Moloney FJ, Guitera P, Coates E, et al. . Detection of primary melanoma in individuals at extreme high risk: a prospective 5-year follow-up study. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150(8):819-827. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.514
    1. Argenziano G, Soyer HP. Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions—a valuable tool for early diagnosis of melanoma. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2(7):443-449. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(00)00422-8
    1. Xiong YQ, Ma SJ, Mo Y, Huo ST, Wen YQ, Chen Q. Comparison of dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy for the diagnosis of malignant skin tumours: a meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2017;143(9):1627-1635. doi:10.1007/s00432-017-2391-9
    1. Braga JC, Scope A, Klaz I, et al. . The significance of reflectance confocal microscopy in the assessment of solitary pink skin lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;61(2):230-241. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2009.02.036
    1. Argenziano G, Cerroni L, Zalaudek I, et al. . Accuracy in melanoma detection: a 10-year multicenter survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67(1):54-59. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2011.07.019
    1. Petty AJ, Ackerson B, Garza R, et al. . Meta-analysis of number needed to treat for diagnosis of melanoma by clinical setting. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(5):1158-1165. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.12.063
    1. Salerni G, Terán T, Puig S, et al. . Meta-analysis of digital dermoscopy follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions: a study on behalf of the International Dermoscopy Society. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2013;27(7):805-814. doi:10.1111/jdv.12032
    1. Condorelli AG, Farnetani F, Ciardo S, et al. . Dynamic dermoscopic and reflectance confocal microscopic changes of melanocytic lesions excised during follow up. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;86(5):1049-1057. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.03.081
    1. Longo C, Zalaudek I, Argenziano G, Pellacani G. New directions in dermatopathology: in vivo confocal microscopy in clinical practice. Dermatol Clin. 2012;30(4):799-814. doi:10.1016/j.det.2012.06.012
    1. Pellacani G, Guitera P, Longo C, Avramidis M, Seidenari S, Menzies S. The impact of in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy for the diagnostic accuracy of melanoma and equivocal melanocytic lesions. J Invest Dermatol. 2007;127(12):2759-2765. doi:10.1038/sj.jid.5700993
    1. Guitera P, Menzies SW, Longo C, Cesinaro AM, Scolyer RA, Pellacani G. In vivo confocal microscopy for diagnosis of melanoma and basal cell carcinoma using a two-step method: analysis of 710 consecutive clinically equivocal cases. J Invest Dermatol. 2012;132(10):2386-2394. doi:10.1038/jid.2012.172
    1. Guitera P, Pellacani G, Crotty KA, et al. . The impact of in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy on the diagnostic accuracy of lentigo maligna and equivocal pigmented and nonpigmented macules of the face. J Invest Dermatol. 2010;130(8):2080-2091. doi:10.1038/jid.2010.84
    1. Guitera P, Pellacani G, Longo C, Seidenari S, Avramidis M, Menzies SW. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy enhances secondary evaluation of melanocytic lesions. J Invest Dermatol. 2009;129(1):131-138. doi:10.1038/jid.2008.193
    1. Dinnes J, Deeks JJ, Saleh D, et al. ; Cochrane Skin Cancer Diagnostic Test Accuracy Group . Reflectance confocal microscopy for diagnosing cutaneous melanoma in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;12(12):CD013190. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD013190
    1. Scope A, Farnetani F, Haupt S, Schechtman E, Longo C, Pellacani G. Dermoscopic and clinical predictors of reflectance confocal microscopy patterns of typical nevi on the back and legs: a cross-sectional study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85(5):1240-1247. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.06.020
    1. Gordon LG, Rowell D. Health system costs of skin cancer and cost-effectiveness of skin cancer prevention and screening: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2015;24(2):141-149. doi:10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000056
    1. Pezzini C, Kaleci S, Chester J, Farnetani F, Longo C, Pellacani G. Reflectance confocal microscopy diagnostic accuracy for malignant melanoma in different clinical settings: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(10):2268-2279. doi:10.1111/jdv.16248
    1. Yélamos O, Manubens E, Jain M, et al. . Improvement of diagnostic confidence and management of equivocal skin lesions by integration of reflectance confocal microscopy in daily practice: prospective study in 2 referral skin cancer centers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83(4):1057-1063. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.05.101
    1. 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):1044-1051. doi:10.1111/bjd.13148
    1. Pellacani G, Farnetani F, Chester J, et al. . Cutaneous melanoma systematic diagnostic workflows and integrated reflectance confocal microscopy assessed with a retrospective, comparative longitudinal (2009-2018) study. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(3):838. doi:10.3390/cancers14030838
    1. Witkowski AM, Łudzik J, Arginelli F, et al. . Improving diagnostic sensitivity of combined dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy imaging through double reader concordance evaluation in telemedicine settings: a retrospective study of 1000 equivocal cases. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0187748. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0187748
    1. Pellacani G, Witkowski A, Cesinaro AM, et al. . Cost-benefit of reflectance confocal microscopy in the diagnostic performance of melanoma. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2016;30(3):413-419. doi:10.1111/jdv.13408
    1. Carli P, De Giorgi V, Chiarugi A, et al. . Effect of lesion size on the diagnostic performance of dermoscopy in melanoma detection. Dermatology. 2003;206(4):292-296. doi:10.1159/000069939
    1. Nelson KC, Swetter SM, Saboda K, Chen SC, Curiel-Lewandrowski C. Evaluation of the number-needed-to-biopsy metric for the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155(10):1167-1174. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.1514
    1. Guitera P, Menzies SW, Coates E, et al. . Efficiency of detecting new primary melanoma among individuals treated in a high-risk clinic for skin surveillance. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(5):521-530. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.5651
    1. Privalle A, Havighurst T, Kim K, Bennett DD, Xu YG. Number of skin biopsies needed per malignancy: comparing the use of skin biopsies among dermatologists and nondermatologist clinicians. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(1):110-116. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.08.012
    1. 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):669-676. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2008.08713.x
    1. Reiter O, Mimouni I, Gdalevich M, et al. . The diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy for basal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80(5):1380-1388. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2018.12.026
    1. Xiong YD, Ma S, Li X, Zhong X, Duan C, Chen Q. A meta-analysis of reflectance confocal microscopy for the diagnosis of malignant skin tumours. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2016;30(8):1295-1302. doi:10.1111/jdv.13712
    1. Lan J, Wen J, Cao S, et al. . The diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy for amelanotic/hypomelanotic melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Dermatol. 2020;183(2):210-219. doi:10.1111/bjd.18722
    1. Ferris LK. Early detection of melanoma: rethinking the outcomes that matter. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(5):511-513. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.5650
    1. Welch HG, Mazer BL, Adamson AS. The rapid rise in cutaneous melanoma diagnoses. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(1):72-79. doi:10.1056/NEJMsb2019760
    1. Rubin R. Melanoma diagnoses rise while mortality stays fairly flat, raising concerns about overdiagnosis. JAMA. 2020;323(15):1429-1430. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.2669

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe