ReviewJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2026
International Dermoscopy Society consensus recommendations for the management of lentigo maligna.
Review in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- International Dermoscopy Society consensus recommendations for the management of lentigo maligna.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
53 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lentigo maligna (LM) is a subtype of cutaneous melanoma in situ that develops on chronically sun-damaged skin in elderly individuals. Its diagnosis and management remain challenging due to its slow progression, frequent occurrence on cosmetically sensitive areas in frail individuals, and tendency for subclinical peripheral extension. Despite its potential for invasive transformation, the natural history of LM remains incompletely understood and evidence-based management strategies for this specific entity remain limited. This work aims to bridge the gap between scarce high-quality evidence and the clinicians' need for practical guidance on LM management by formulating evidence-based and expert consensus-driven recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Under the coordination of the International Dermoscopy Society, a global, multidisciplinary consortium of 53 experts-including dermatologists, dermato-oncologists, dermatologic surgeons, radiologists, radiotherapists, pathologists and epidemiologists-formulated recommendations through structured consensus, informed by a comprehensive review of current scientific evidence and clinical practice standards. Optimal management of LM requires accurate diagnosis and individualized treatment planning. Non-invasive skin imaging techniques, especially dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy, aid in diagnosis, biopsy orientation, lesion delineation and post-treatment monitoring. Multiple partial biopsies help confirm diagnosis and rule out invasion. Complete surgical excision remains the first treatment option. No definitive safety margins can be recommended for standard surgery; margin-controlled techniques are preferable for large or ill-defined lesions. Topical imiquimod and radiotherapy are effective alternatives where surgery is unsuitable. Topical imiquimod is useful as primary, adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy. Blind destructive methods should be avoided. Close clinical and imaging follow-up is needed. Patient-centred care, shared decision-making, and a multidisciplinary approach are critical for optimal outcomes. These international consensus recommendations summarize current best practices for LM management, offering practical, evidence-informed guidance to clinicians while acknowledging the potential of future research in refining these conclusions.
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.