OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic performance of SolarScan (Polartechnics Ltd, Sydney, Australia), an automated instrument for the diagnosis of primary melanoma. DESIGN: Images from a data set of 2430 lesions (382 were melanomas; median Breslow thickness, 0.36 mm) were divided into a training set and an independent test set at a ratio of approximately 2:1. A diagnostic algorithm (absolute diagnosis of melanoma vs benign lesion and estimated probability of melanoma) was developed and its performance described on the test set. High-quality clinical and dermoscopy images with a detailed patient history for 78 lesions (13 of which were melanomas) from the test set were given to various clinicians to compare their diagnostic accuracy with that of SolarScan. SETTING: Seven specialist referral centers and 2 general practice skin cancer clinics from 3 continents. Comparison between clinician diagnosis and SolarScan diagnosis was by 3 dermoscopy experts, 4 dermatologists, 3 trainee dermatologists, and 3 general practitioners. PATIENTS: Images of the melanocytic lesions were obtained from patients who required either excision or digital monitoring to exclude malignancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, median probability for the diagnosis of melanoma, a direct comparison of SolarScan with diagnoses performed by humans, and interinstrument and intrainstrument reproducibility. RESULTS: The melanocytic-only diagnostic model was highly reproducible in the test set and gave a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-96%) and specificity of 68% (95% CI, 64%-72%) for melanoma. SolarScan had comparable or superior sensitivity and specificity (85% vs 65%) compared with those of experts (90% vs 59%), dermatologists (81% vs 60%), trainees (85% vs 36%; P =.06), and general practitioners (62% vs 63%). The intraclass correlation coefficient of intrainstrument repeatability was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88), indicating an excellent repeatability. There was no significant interinstrument variation (P = .80). CONCLUSIONS: SolarScan is a robust diagnostic instrument for pigmented or partially pigmented melanocytic lesions of the skin. Preliminary data suggest that its performance is comparable or superior to that of a range of clinician groups. However, these findings should be confirmed in a formal clinical trial.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic performance of SolarScan (Polartechnics Ltd, Sydney, Australia), an automated instrument for the diagnosis of primary melanoma. DESIGN: Images from a data set of 2430 lesions (382 were melanomas; median Breslow thickness, 0.36 mm) were divided into a training set and an independent test set at a ratio of approximately 2:1. A diagnostic algorithm (absolute diagnosis of melanoma vs benign lesion and estimated probability of melanoma) was developed and its performance described on the test set. High-quality clinical and dermoscopy images with a detailed patient history for 78 lesions (13 of which were melanomas) from the test set were given to various clinicians to compare their diagnostic accuracy with that of SolarScan. SETTING: Seven specialist referral centers and 2 general practice skin cancer clinics from 3 continents. Comparison between clinician diagnosis and SolarScan diagnosis was by 3 dermoscopy experts, 4 dermatologists, 3 trainee dermatologists, and 3 general practitioners. PATIENTS: Images of the melanocytic lesions were obtained from patients who required either excision or digital monitoring to exclude malignancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, median probability for the diagnosis of melanoma, a direct comparison of SolarScan with diagnoses performed by humans, and interinstrument and intrainstrument reproducibility. RESULTS: The melanocytic-only diagnostic model was highly reproducible in the test set and gave a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-96%) and specificity of 68% (95% CI, 64%-72%) for melanoma. SolarScan had comparable or superior sensitivity and specificity (85% vs 65%) compared with those of experts (90% vs 59%), dermatologists (81% vs 60%), trainees (85% vs 36%; P =.06), and general practitioners (62% vs 63%). The intraclass correlation coefficient of intrainstrument repeatability was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88), indicating an excellent repeatability. There was no significant interinstrument variation (P = .80). CONCLUSIONS: SolarScan is a robust diagnostic instrument for pigmented or partially pigmented melanocytic lesions of the skin. Preliminary data suggest that its performance is comparable or superior to that of a range of clinician groups. However, these findings should be confirmed in a formal clinical trial.
Authors: M Emre Celebi; Hassan A Kingravi; Bakhtiyar Uddin; Hitoshi Iyatomi; Y Alp Aslandogan; William V Stoecker; Randy H Moss Journal: Comput Med Imaging Graph Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 4.790
Authors: Philipp Tschandl; Noel Codella; Bengü Nisa Akay; Giuseppe Argenziano; Ralph P Braun; Horacio Cabo; David Gutman; Allan Halpern; Brian Helba; Rainer Hofmann-Wellenhof; Aimilios Lallas; Jan Lapins; Caterina Longo; Josep Malvehy; Michael A Marchetti; Ashfaq Marghoob; Scott Menzies; Amanda Oakley; John Paoli; Susana Puig; Christoph Rinner; Cliff Rosendahl; Alon Scope; Christoph Sinz; H Peter Soyer; Luc Thomas; Iris Zalaudek; Harald Kittler Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Philipp Tschandl; Cliff Rosendahl; Bengu Nisa Akay; Giuseppe Argenziano; Andreas Blum; Ralph P Braun; Horacio Cabo; Jean-Yves Gourhant; Jürgen Kreusch; Aimilios Lallas; Jan Lapins; Ashfaq Marghoob; Scott Menzies; Nina Maria Neuber; John Paoli; Harold S Rabinovitz; Christoph Rinner; Alon Scope; H Peter Soyer; Christoph Sinz; Luc Thomas; Iris Zalaudek; Harald Kittler Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Paolo A Ascierto; Marco Palla; Fabrizio Ayala; Ileana De Michele; Corrado Caracò; Antonio Daponte; Ester Simeone; Stefano Mori; Maurizio Del Giudice; Rocco A Satriano; Antonio Vozza; Giuseppe Palmieri; Nicola Mozzillo Journal: BMC Dermatol Date: 2010-08-13