Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42153517›Full record

Observational studyLasers in surgery and medicine2026

A Prospective, Observational Study Evaluating the Diagnostic Performance of a Newly FDA-Approved Line-Field Optical Coherence Tomography (LC-OCT) in the Detection of Basal Cell Carcinoma.

Aisling O'Donnell, Halima Amro, Thu Anh Ly, Orit Markowitz

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Lasers in surgery and medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Aisling O'DonnellOptiSkin Medical, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3803-3216
Halima AmroOptiSkin Medical, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6317-2374
Thu Anh LyOptiSkin Medical, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9947-6456
Orit MarkowitzOptiSkin Medical, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3668-8631

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe prospectively enrolled 131 lesions of 104 patients to confirm or rule out the diagnosis of BCC. Dermoscopy, line-field optical coherence tomography (LC-OCT), and Reflectance confocal microscopy 1500 (RCM) images were evaluated by one blinded expert (OM).

objectivesThe primary objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of LC-OCT in lesions clinically suspicious for basal cell carcinoma (BCC), by determining the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of this technique. Diagnostic performances were evaluated in two distinct real-life settings: lesions for which tissue-coupled reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) served as the reference standard, and lesions for which histopathological examination following biopsy was used as the reference standard. The secondary objectives were to assess clinician confidence when using dermoscopy, LC-OCT, and RCM, and to estimate the agreement rate between LC-OCT and RCM findings.

methodsDesign: Single-center, nonrandomized, blinded, prospective, observational study.

settingOptiSkin.

participantsPatients with Fitzpatrick Skin Types I-IV between the ages of 29-92 years from OptiSkin are eligible for this study. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical, dermoscopic, and LC-OCT images were obtained for all subjects. Further, measurements on the lesion included either an RCM examination or a traditional cutting biopsy, depending on body location, insurance coverage, or patient preference. At each stage, the clinician provided her confidence level in her diagnosis.

resultsA total of 131 lesions clinically suspicious for BCC were imaged with LC-OCT in 104 patients. LC-OCT successfully imaged all 131 lesions, including those in challenging anatomical regions inaccessible to RCM, such as the nose. PRIMARY

objectiveTissue-coupled RCM was performed on 63 lesions, for which LC-OCT achieved 95.9% sensitivity, 85.7% specificity, and 93.7% accuracy (PPV 95.9%, NPV 85.7%). This analysis revealed four disagreements: two FN and two FP. The remaining 68 lesions, diagnosed with histology, showed 86.4% sensitivity, 79.2% specificity, and 83.8% accuracy (PPV 88.4%, NPV 76.0%). This analysis revealed 11 disagreements, 6 FN, and 5 FP. Using RCM or histology when available as the gold standard, LC-OCT had an overall sensitivity of 91.2%, specificity of 77.50%, and accuracy of 86.92%. SECONDARY

objectiveFor the 63 lesions evaluated with both LC-OCT and RCM, the agreement rate was 93.6% (Cohen's Kappa 0.81), with only 4 diagnostic discrepancies (2 FN and 2 FP). High-confidence LC-OCT diagnoses (≥ 8/10) achieved 100% sensitivity.

conclusionOur findings demonstrate that LC-OCT provides high sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV when tested against both tissue-coupled RCM and histopathology. LC-OCT was easy to use in challenging facial regions where the RCM device can be difficult to operate. This high diagnostic accuracy suggests that LC-OCT may reduce the need for immediate biopsy, streamline clinical decision-making, and minimize scarring, thereby improving cosmetic outcomes. Although the widespread adoption of LC-OCT in the United States remains limited by current reimbursement barriers, this technology has the potential to become an essential tool in modern dermatologic oncology.

Indexed as

Basal Cell CarcinomaSkin NeoplasmsTomography, Optical CoherenceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDermoscopyFemaleHumansMaleMicroscopy, ConfocalMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesSensitivity and Specificitybasal cell carcinoma (BCC)diagnostic biopsyhistology (H&E)line field confocal optical coherence tomography (LC‐OCT)noninvasive diagnosisreflectance confocal microscopy (RCM)skin cancer

Identifiers

PMID42153517
PMCPMC13466150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.