ArticleJournal of cutaneous pathology2026
The Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing on Interobserver Agreement and Diagnostic Accuracy of Deep Penetrating Melanocytic Neoplasms.
Article in Journal of cutaneous pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Melanocytomas : Intermediate melanocytic neoplasms with distinct morphology and molecular background].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- What Is Pediatric Melanoma? Clinical and Genomic Features and the Role of Next-Generation Sequencing in Tumor Classification.International journal of dermatology · 2026Review
- The Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing on Interobserver Agreement and Diagnostic Accuracy of Deep Penetrating Melanocytic Neoplasms.Journal of cutaneous pathology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
38 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNext-generation sequencing (NGS) is becoming more commonly used for diagnosis in dermatopathology. It's critical to appraise its efficacy and limitations. Distinguishing benign deep penetrating nevi (DPN) from deep penetrating like-melanoma (DPN-M) is a challenging diagnostic scenario even for experienced dermatopathologists.
methodsWe sent a two-phase survey (pre-and postgenomics) to 32 experienced dermatopathologists to evaluate 39 diagnostically challenging cases from the DPN/WNT-activated family of melanocytic neoplasms.
resultsWith NGS data, interobserver agreement improved from 0.41 to 0.51 (p < 0.0001) in distinguishing DPN-M from nonmelanoma cases. Overall diagnostic accuracy improved, mostly driven by a 16% increase in accurate diagnosis of DPN-M. However, in two cases, the inclusion of genomics shifted the majority vote from a correct to an incorrect diagnosis. A total of 218 diagnostic changes occurred between Survey 1 and 2. Among the changes, 132 votes moved toward the correct diagnosis while 86 moved toward an incorrect diagnosis. The shift in voting which resulted in improved diagnostic accuracy was statistically significant (p = 0.0001).
conclusionsNGS has the potential to improve interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy. We provide guidance on the utilization of bioinformatic data to maximize its benefits and improve diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement.
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.