ArticleExperimental dermatology2026
Clinical Validation of Imaging Biomarkers in Mycosis Fungoides.
Article in Experimental dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-Invasive Skin Imaging Techniques for Diagnosing and Monitoring Mycosis Fungoides: A Comprehensive Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Clinical Validation of Imaging Biomarkers in Mycosis Fungoides.Experimental dermatology · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The composite index lesion severity (CAILS) score is used to monitor disease and therapeutic response in mycosis fungoides (MF), but is limited by interobserver variability and low sensitivity. Emerging imaging techniques, such as multispectral imaging (MSI), colourimetry and laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI), offer objective alternatives for quantifying CAILS parameters. The aim of this study was to evaluate non-invasive imaging modalities for objective and reliable quantification of disease extent in MF. Sixty-six participants were enrolled in two prospective studies: a cross-sectional discovery cohort to assess baseline characteristics of 35 MF patients (IA-IVB) and 10 healthy controls using CAILS and MSI, and a longitudinal confirmation cohort including 21 early-stage MF patients (IA-IIA) treated with chlormethine gel 0.016% for 16 weeks, in whom lesional and non-lesional skin were assessed using CAILS, MSI, colourimetry and LSCI at multiple time points. Candidate biomarkers were required to meet five clinical validation criteria: disease discrimination, repeatability, treatment responsiveness, correlation with CAILS and patient acceptability. In the discovery cohort, MSI detected significant differences in erythema, pigmentation, elevation and desquamation between healthy, non-lesional and lesional skin. In the confirmation cohort, four candidate biomarkers met all validation criteria: MSI CIELAB a*, MSI average haemoglobin, and colourimetry CIELAB a* (DSMIII) for quantifying erythema, and MSI individual typology angle (ITA) for pigmentation. These biomarkers reliably discriminated lesional from non-lesional skin (p ≤ 0.001), showed strong test-retest reliability (CV < 10%, ICC > 0.84), detected treatment effects, showed moderate concordance with CAILS, and were associated with low patient burden (mean 3.4/100). These findings show that MSI- and colourimetry-derived biomarkers can objectively monitor disease extent in MF and complement existing clinical assessments.
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.