Observational studyExperimental dermatology2026
Dermoscopic-Pathologic Correlates of Invasiveness and Nevus Visibility in Nevus-Associated Melanoma.
Observational study in Experimental dermatology, 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.
- Comment on 'Dermoscopic-Pathologic Correlates of Invasiveness and Nevus Visibility in Nevus-Associated Melanoma'.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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nevus-associated melanoma (NAM) is histologically defined by coexisting nevus and melanoma components, yet the nevus component is frequently not visible on dermoscopy. We performed a retrospective, single-centre observational study including histologically diagnosed NAMs (2011-2024). Dermoscopic images were assessed independently by two readers. Histopathology was systematically revised to quantify nevus proportion, size, and depth. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations with (a) invasive vs. in situ NAM and (b) dermoscopically visible vs. non-visible nevus component. Among 340 NAMs, 36.8% were in situ and 63.2% invasive. A dermoscopic nevus was visible in 45.6%. In multivariable analysis, nevus visibility under dermoscopy was independently associated with histopathologic features such as larger nevus size, particularly 2.1-4 mm (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.3-4.6), 4.1-10 mm (OR 3.7, 95% CI 2.0-7.0), and > 10 mm (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.4-20.0), whereas deep nevus location (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.5) and ulceration (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.6) reduced visibility. Invasive NAM was independently associated with a visible nevus component under dermoscopy (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.7-3.7), shiny white structures (OR 5.0, 95% CI 2.6-9.4), negative pigment network (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.2), and blue-white veil (OR 8.3, 95% CI 4.5-15.4), whereas atypical pigment network and melanoma pigmentation were inversely associated with invasion. Dermoscopic nevus visibility in NAM is mainly determined by nevus size and depth, while melanoma-related changes, particularly ulceration, can obscure the nevus component. Dermoscopic markers of invasiveness should prompt timely management even when an associated nevus is suspected.
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.