Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42872360›Full record

ReviewSkin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI)2026

Non-invasive Imaging Modalities for Breslow Thickness Estimation in Melanoma: A Scoping Review.

Biagio Scotti, Martina Lambertini, Leonardo Veneziano, Federico Venturi, Elisabetta Magnaterra, Carlotta Baraldi, Emi Dika

Abstract readScoping ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Review in Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Biagio ScottiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7461-1726
Martina LambertiniOncologic Dermatology Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4282-342X
Leonardo VenezianoOncologic Dermatology Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2550-4630
Federico VenturiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5053-4172
Elisabetta MagnaterraDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3263-4353
Carlotta BaraldiOncologic Dermatology Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Emi DikaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3186-2861

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreslow thickness (BT) is the most important prognostic biomarker in cutaneous melanoma and directly influences surgical management, sentinel lymph node biopsy decisions and survival outcomes. Several non-invasive imaging modalities have been investigated for preoperative BT estimation; however, their relative performance and clinical applicability remain unclear.

objectiveTo evaluate the agreement between non-invasive imaging-derived and histopathologically measured BT and to compare the technical characteristics, diagnostic performance, and clinical utility of currently available imaging modalities for preoperative melanoma staging.

methodsA scoping review was conducted according to Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and reported following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to December 1, 2025. Original studies evaluating non-invasive imaging techniques for BT estimation in cutaneous melanoma were included. Imaging modalities assessed comprised dermoscopy, reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM), optical coherence tomography (OCT), ultrasound (US), multispectral imaging (MSI), photoacoustic techniques, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and artificial intelligence (AI)-based approaches.

resultsNinety-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Dermoscopy provided indirect assessment of invasiveness, while RCM and OCT offered complementary microstructural information but limited direct thickness estimation. US, particularly high-frequency (≥20 MHz) and ultra-high-frequency (≥50 MHz) systems, showed the strongest and most consistent evidence for direct BT assessment, with correlation coefficients often exceeding 0.90 and high performance across clinically relevant thresholds. Nevertheless, performance varied across devices, probe frequencies, acquisition protocols, and operators, with frequent overestimation and reduced accuracy in selected subgroups (in situ and thin melanomas). MSI showed moderate-to-good classification performance, while photoacoustic techniques yielded promising results but limited to small cohorts. Evidence for MRI and SPECT was scarce. AI-based approaches achieved moderate-to-good predictive performance but did not consistently outperform experienced clinicians, with generalizability limited by dataset and methodological heterogeneity.

conclusionsUS currently represents the most extensively validated and clinically applicable non-invasive modality for preoperative BT estimation. A hierarchical imaging approach appears most appropriate, with dermoscopy as the first-line diagnostic tool, RCM and OCT providing additional lesion characterization, and HFUS enabling complementary depth assessment in lesions strongly suspicious for melanoma. Emerging photoacoustic and AI-based approaches require further validation, while histopathology remains the reference standard for definitive diagnosis and BT measurement.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingMelanomaSkin NeoplasmsDermoscopyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm StagingTomography, Optical CoherenceUltrasonographyAIBreslowdepthdermoscopyimagingmelanomaOCTRCMthicknessUS

Identifiers

PMID42872360
PMCPMC13662740

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.