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

J Malvehy, A Hauschild, C Curiel-Lewandrowski, P Mohr, R Hofmann-Wellenhof, R Motley, C Berking, D Grossman, J Paoli, C Loquai, J Olah, U Reinhold, H Wenger, T Dirschka, S Davis, C Henderson, H Rabinovitz, J Welzel, D Schadendorf, U Birgersson, J Malvehy, A Hauschild, C Curiel-Lewandrowski, P Mohr, R Hofmann-Wellenhof, R Motley, C Berking, D Grossman, J Paoli, C Loquai, J Olah, U Reinhold, H Wenger, T Dirschka, S Davis, C Henderson, H Rabinovitz, J Welzel, D Schadendorf, U Birgersson

Abstract

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.

© 2014 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
The study's histopathological gold standard plotted against the Nevisense score outcome. EIS, electrical impedance spectroscopy.

References

    1. Tsao H, Atkins M, Sober A, et al. Management of cutaneous melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:998–1012.
    1. Balch C, Gershenwald J, Soong S-J, et al. Final version of 2009 AJCC melanoma staging and classification. J Clin Oncol. 2009;36:6199–206.
    1. Soyer HP, Smolle J, Leitinger G, et al. Diagnostic reliability of dermoscopic criteria for detecting malignant melanoma. Dermatology. 1995;190:25–30.
    1. Binder M, Kittler H, Seeber A, et al. Epiluminescence microscopybased classification of pigmented skin lesions using computerized image analysis and an artificial neural network. Melanoma Res. 1998;8:261–6.
    1. Lorentzen H, Weismann K, Petersen CS, et al. Clinical and dermatoscopic diagnosis of malignant melanoma: assessed by expert and non-expert groups. Acta Derm Venereol. 1999;79:301–4.
    1. Collas H, Delbarre M, De Preville PA, et al. Dermatologists of the Postgraduate Association of Haute-Normandie. Evaluation of the diagnosis of pigmented tumors of the skin and factors leading to a decision to excise. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 1999;126:494–500.
    1. Seidenari S, Pellicani G, Gianetti A. Digital videomicroscopy and image analysis with automatic classification for detection of thin melanomas. Melanoma Res. 1999;9:163–71.
    1. Andreassi L, Perotti R, Rubegni P, et al. Digital dermoscopy analysis for the differentiation of atypical nevi and early melanoma. Arch Dermatol. 1999;135:1459–65.
    1. Bataille V, Sasieni P, Curley RK, et al. Melanoma yield, number of biopsies and missed melanomas in a British teaching hospital pigmented lesion clinic: a 9-year retrospective study. Br J Dermatol. 1999;140:243–8.
    1. Benelli C, Roscetti E, Dal Pozzo V. Reproducibility of a dermoscopic method (7FFM) for the diagnosis of malignant melanoma. Eur J Dermatol. 2000;10:110–14.
    1. Stanganelli I, Serafini M, Bucchi LA. A cancer-registry-assisted evaluation of the accuracy of digital epiluminescence microscopy associated with clinical examination of pigmented skin lesions. Dermatology. 2000;200:11–16.
    1. Ganster H, Pinz A, Röhrer R, et al. Automated melanoma recognition. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001;3:233–9.
    1. Bafounta ML, Beauchet A, Aegerter P. Is dermoscopy (epiluminescence microscopy) useful for diagnosis of melanoma? Arch Dermatol. 2001;137:1343–50.
    1. Megahed M, Schön M, Selimovic D, et al. Reliability of diagnosis of melanoma in situ. Lancet. 2002;359:1921–2.
    1. Offidani A, Simonetti O, Bernardini O, et al. General practitioners’ accuracy in diagnosing skin cancers. Dermatology. 2002;205:127–30.
    1. Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. Lancet Oncol. 2002;3:159–65.
    1. English D, Burton R, del Mar C, et al. Evaluation of aid to diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions in general practice: controlled trial randomised by practice. BMJ. 2003;327:1–6.
    1. Argenziano G, Soyer HP, Chimenti S, et al. Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions: results of a consensus meeting via the Internet. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;48:679–93.
    1. Carli P, Nardini P, Crocetti E, et al. Frequency and characteristics of melanomas missed at a pigmented lesion clinic: a registry-based study. Melanoma Res. 2004;14:403–7.
    1. Youl P, Baade P, Janda M, et al. Diagnosing skin cancer in primary care: how do mainstream general practitioners compare with primary care skin cancer clinic doctors? Med J Aust. 2007;187:215–20.
    1. Carli P, De Giorgi V, Crocetti E, et al. Improvement of malignant/benign ratio in excised melanocytic lesions in the ‘dermoscopy era’: a retrospective study 1997–2001. Br J Dermatol. 2004;150:687–92.
    1. English DR, Del Mar C, Burton RC. Factors influencing the number needed to excise: excision rates of pigmented lesions by general practitioners. Med J Aust. 2004;180:16–19.
    1. Robinson JK, Nickoloff BJ. Digital epiluminescence microscopy monitoring of high-risk patients. Arch Dermatol. 2004;140:49–56.
    1. Banky JP, Kelly JW, English DR, et al. Incidence of new and changed nevi and melanomas detected using baseline images and dermoscopy in patients at high risk for melanoma. Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:998–1006.
    1. Soares T, Laman S, Yiannias J, et al. Factors leading to the biopsy of 1547 pigmented lesions at Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, in 2005. Int J Dermatol. 2009;48:1053–6.
    1. Chen SC, Pennie ML, Kolm P, et al. Diagnosing and managing cutaneous pigmented lesions: primary care physicians versus dermatologists. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:678–82.
    1. Byrnes P, Ackermann E, Williams I, et al. Management of skin cancer in Australia. A comparison of general practice and skin cancer clinics. Aust Fam Physician. 2007;36:1073–5.
    1. Nathansohn N, Orenstein A, Trau H, et al. Pigmented lesions clinic for early detection of melanoma: preliminary results. Isr Med Assoc J. 2007;9:708–12.
    1. Fuller SR, Bowen GM, Tanner B, et al. Digital dermoscopic monitoring of atypical nevi in patients at risk for melanoma. Dermatol Surg. 2007;33:1198–206.
    1. Vestergaard ME, Macaskill P, Holt PE, et al. 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;159:669–76.
    1. Heal CF, Raasch BA, Buettner PG, et al. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of skin lesions. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159:661–8.
    1. Menzies S, Emery J, Staples M, et al. Impact of dermoscopy and short-term sequential digital dermoscopy imaging for the management of pigmented lesions in primary care: a sequential intervention trial. Br J Dermatol. 2009;161:1270–7.
    1. Warshaw EM, Lederle FA, Grill JP, et al. Accuracy of teledermatology for pigmented neoplasms. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;61:753–65.
    1. Rosendahl C, Tschandl P, Cameron A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy for melanocytic and nonmelanocytic pigmented lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;64:1068–73.
    1. Salerni G, Carrera C, Lovatto L, 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;67:836–45.
    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;27:805–14.
    1. Guitera P, Menzies S. State of the art of diagnostic technology for early-stage melanoma. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2011;11:715–23.
    1. Terushkin V, Oliviera S, Marghoob A, et al. Use of and beliefs about total body photography and dermatoscopy among US dermatology training programs: an update. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;62:794–803.
    1. Salerni G, Carrera C, Lovatto L, et al. Benefits of total body photography and digital dermatoscopy (“two-step method of digital follow-up”) in the early diagnosis of melanoma in patients at high risk for melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:17–27.
    1. Curiel-Lewandrowski C, Williams CM, Swindells KJ, et al. Use of in vivo confocal microscopy in malignant melanoma: an aid in diagnosis, and assessment of surgical and non-surgical therapeutic approaches. Arch Dermatol. 2004;140:1127–32.
    1. Guitera P, Menzies SW, Longo C, et al. 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;132:2386–94.
    1. Lui H, Zhao J, McLean D, et al. Real-time Raman spectroscopy for in vivo skin cancer diagnosis. Cancer Res. 2012;72:2491–500.
    1. Boden I, Nyström J, Lundskog B, et al. Non-invasive identification of melanoma with near-infrared and skin impedance spectroscopy. Skin Res Technol. 2013;19:473–8.
    1. Moheit G, Cognetta A, Ferris L, et al. The performance of MelaFind. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147:188–94.
    1. Menzies SW, Bischof L, Talbot H, et al. The performance of SolarScan: an automated dermoscopy image analysis instrument for the diagnosis of primary melanoma. Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:1388–96.
    1. Wachsman W, Morhenn V, Palmer T, et al. Noninvasive genomic detection of melanoma. Br J Dermatol. 2011;164:797–806.
    1. Åberg P, Birgersson U, Elsner P, et al. Electrical impedance spectroscopy and the diagnostic accuracy for malignant melanoma. Exp Dermatol. 2011;20:648–52.
    1. Mohr P, Birgersson U, Berking C, et al. Electrical impedance spectroscopy as a potential adjunct diagnostic tool for cutaneous melanoma. Skin Research Technol. 2013;19:75–83.
    1. Friedman RJ, Rigel DS, Kopf AW. Early detection of malignant melanoma: the role of physician examination and self-examination of the skin. CA Cancer J Clin. 1985;35:130–51.
    1. Abbasi N, Shaw H, Rigel D, et al. Early diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma revisiting the ABCD criteria. JAMA. 2004;292:2771–6.
    1. Nachbar F, Stolz W, Merkle T, et al. The ABCD rule of dermatoscopy: high prospective value in the diagnosis of doubtful melanocytic skin lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1994;30:551–9.
    1. Argenziano G, Fabbrocini G, Carli P, et al. 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;134:1563–70.
    1. Bataille V. Risk factors for melanoma development. Expert Rev Dermatol. 2009;4:533–9.
    1. Grob JJ, Bonerandi JJ. The ‘ugly duckling’ sign: identification of the common characteristics of nevi in an individual as a basis for melanoma screening. Arch Dermatol. 1998;134:103–4.
    1. Gachon J, Beaulieu P, Sei JF, et al. First prospective study of the recognition process of melanoma in dermatological practice. Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:434–8.
    1. Hofmann-Wellenhof R, Blum A, Wolf IH, et al. Dermoscopic classification of atypical melanocytic nevi (Clark nevi) Arch Dermatol. 2001;137:1575–80.
    1. Aldridge R, Naysmith L, Ooi E, et al. 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 melanoma. Acta Derm Venereol. 2013;93:689–92.
    1. Balch C, Buzaid A, Soong SJ, et al. Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2002;19:3635–48.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться