Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38927909›Full record

ArticleCancers2024

Comparison of Extended Skin Cancer Screening Using a Three-Step Advanced Imaging Programme vs. Standard-of-Care Examination in a High-Risk Melanoma Patient Cohort.

Frank Friedrich Gellrich, Nadia Eberl, Julian Steininger, Friedegund Meier, Stefan Beissert, Sarah Hobelsberger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Frank Friedrich GellrichDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2164-4644
Nadia EberlDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Julian SteiningerDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9094-4512
Friedegund MeierDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Stefan BeissertDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Sarah HobelsbergerDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5703-324X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern diagnostic procedures, such as three-dimensional total body photography (3D-TBP), digital dermoscopy (DD), and reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM), can improve melanoma diagnosis, particularly in high-risk patients. This study assessed the benefits of combining these advanced imaging techniques in a three-step programme in managing high-risk patients. This study included 410 high-risk melanoma patients who underwent a specialised imaging consultation in addition to their regular skin examinations in outpatient care. At each visit, the patients underwent a 3D-TBP, a DD for suspicious findings, and an RCM for unclear DD findings. The histological findings of excisions initiated based on imaging consultation and outpatient care were compared. Imaging consultation detected sixteen confirmed melanomas (eight invasive and eight in situ) in 39 excised pigmented lesions. Outpatient care examination detected seven confirmed melanomas (one invasive and six in situ) in 163 excised melanocytic lesions. The number needed to excise (NNE) in the imaging consultation was significantly lower than that in the outpatient care (2.4 vs. 23.3). The NNE was 2.6 for DD and 2.3 for RCM. DD, 3D-TBP, or RCM detected melanomas that were not detected by the other imaging methods. The three-step imaging programme improves melanoma detection and reduces the number of unnecessary excisions in high-risk patients.

Indexed as

digital dermoscopymelanomareflectance confocal microscopyskin cancer screeningtotal body photography

Identifiers

PMID38927909
PMCPMC11201812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.