ReviewEye (London, England)2023
Can the MOLES acronym and scoring system improve the management of patients with melanocytic choroidal tumours?
Review in Eye (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Age distribution and characteristics of choroidal nevi in 35 559 individuals: A nationwide study using optometry fundus photography.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Article
- Imaging-based machine learning for the diagnosis and prognosis of uveal melanoma: a systematic review and meta analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Comparing the use of the Optos Silverstone widefield imaging system with ultrasound B-scanning for the assessment of choroidal naevi.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Review
- Validation of MOLES score for small choroidal melanomas: impact of assuming enlargement for telemedicine in sizable lesions.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Comparison of MOLES and MelCancers · 2026Article
- Choroidal nevus candidacy for monitoring in a virtual photoscreening pathway.European journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Development of a deep learning model to classify choroidal melanoma risk factors based on color fundus photographs.AJO international · 2025Article
- Longitudinal High-Resolution Imaging of Retinal Sequelae of a Choroidal Nevus.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Performance of the MOLES and TFSOM-DIM scores in classifying choroidal nevi and melanoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Using Deep Learning to Distinguish Highly Malignant Uveal Melanoma from Benign Choroidal Nevi.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Real-world experience of implementing the MOLES score in a virtual choroidal naevi clinic at a tertiary referral centre.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Choroidal Nevus Features Associated with Subspecialty Referral.Ophthalmology. Retina · 2023Article
- Is Tumour Thickness Measurement Required for MOLES Scoring of Melanocytic Choroidal Tumours?Ocular oncology and pathology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It can be difficult for practitioners to determine the likelihood of malignancy in melanocytic choroidal tumours. This author has therefore devised the MOLES acronym to highlight the most informative clinical features, which comprise mushroom shape, orange pigment, large size, enlargement, and subretinal fluid. Each of these is scored 0 if absent, 1 if subtle or uncertain, and 2 if present. Tumours are categorised as 'common naevus', 'low-risk naevus', 'high-risk naevus' and 'probable melanoma' according to whether the sum of these five scores is 0, 1, 2 or 3 or more, respectively. Tentative recommendations, subject to future studies, include: review of 'common naevi' by a community optometrist whenever the patient attends for another reason, such as a two-yearly 'check-up' (i.e., 'self-care'); non-urgent referral of patients with 'low-risk naevi' or 'high-risk naevi' to an ophthalmologist to plan long-term surveillance (i.e., determining the frequency of assessments and whether these should be undertaken by an ophthalmologist or a community optometrist); and urgent referral of patients with a MOLES score >2 (i.e., 'probable melanoma') to an ophthalmologist for immediate referral to an ocular oncologist if a suspicion of malignancy is confirmed. The MOLES system does not require assessment of internal acoustic reflectivity by ultrasonography. MOLES scores correlate well with diagnosis of choroidal naevi and melanomas by ocular oncologists; however, further evaluation of this aid in routine optometric practice and other situations is needed. MOLES should prevent unnecessary referral of patients with naevi for second opinion and non-essential monitoring of these patients at hospital eye services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.