Search

Background: Use of artificial intelligence (AI), or machine learning, to assess dermoscopic images of skin lesions to detect melanoma has, in several retrospective studies, shown high levels of diagnostic accuracy on par with - or even outperforming - experienced dermatologists. However, the enthusiasm around these algorithms has not yet been matched by prospective clinical trials performed in authentic clinical settings. In several European countries, including Sweden, the initial clinical assessment of suspected skin cancer is principally conducted in the primary healthcare setting by primary care physicians, with or without access to teledermoscopic support from dermatology clinics., Objectives: To determine the diagnostic performance of an AI-based clinical decision support tool for cutaneous melanoma detection, operated by a smartphone application (app), when used prospectively by primary care physicians to assess skin lesions of concern due to some degree of melanoma suspicion., Methods: This prospective multicentre clinical trial was conducted at 36 primary care centres in Sweden. Physicians used the smartphone app on skin lesions of concern by photographing them dermoscopically, which resulted in a dichotomous decision support text regarding evidence for melanoma. Regardless of the app outcome, all lesions underwent standard diagnostic procedures (surgical excision or referral to a dermatologist). After investigations were complete, lesion diagnoses were collected from the patients' medical records and compared with the app's outcome and other lesion data., Results: In total, 253 lesions of concern in 228 patients were included, of which 21 proved to be melanomas, with 11 thin invasive melanomas and 10 melanomas in situ. The app's accuracy in identifying melanomas was reflected in an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of 0.960 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.928-0.980], corresponding to a maximum sensitivity and specificity of 95.2% and 84.5%, respectively. For invasive melanomas alone, the AUROC was 0.988 (95% CI 0.965-0.997), corresponding to a maximum sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 92.6%, respectively., Conclusions: The clinical decision support tool evaluated in this investigation showed high diagnostic accuracy when used prospectively in primary care patients, which could add significant clinical value for primary care physicians assessing skin lesions for melanoma., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest P.P. is a co-founder of the clinical decision support (Dermalyser®) studied in the clinical trial. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

The rapid increase in telemedicine coupled with recent advances in diagnostic artificial intelligence (AI) create the imperative to consider the opportunities and risks of inserting AI-based support into new paradigms of care. Here we build on recent achievements in the accuracy of image-based AI for skin cancer diagnosis to address the effects of varied representations of AI-based support across different levels of clinical expertise and multiple clinical workflows. We find that good quality AI-based support of clinical decision-making improves diagnostic accuracy over that of either AI or physicians alone, and that the least experienced clinicians gain the most from AI-based support. We further find that AI-based multiclass probabilities outperformed content-based image retrieval (CBIR) representations of AI in the mobile technology environment, and AI-based support had utility in simulations of second opinions and of telemedicine triage. In addition to demonstrating the potential benefits associated with good quality AI in the hands of non-expert clinicians, we find that faulty AI can mislead the entire spectrum of clinicians, including experts. Lastly, we show that insights derived from AI class-activation maps can inform improvements in human diagnosis. Together, our approach and findings offer a framework for future studies across the spectrum of image-based diagnostics to improve human-computer collaboration in clinical practice.

Background: Surgical excision with clear histopathological margins is the preferred treatment to prevent progression of lentigo maligna (LM) to invasive melanoma. However, the assessment of resection margins on sun-damaged skin is challenging. We developed a deep learning model for detection of melanocytes in resection margins of LM. Methods: In total, 353 whole slide images (WSIs) were included. 295 WSIs were used for training and 58 for validation and testing. The algorithm was trained with 3,973 manual pixel-wise annotations. The AI analyses were compared to those of three blinded dermatopathologists and two pathology residents, who performed their evaluations without AI and AI-assisted. Immunohistochemistry (SOX10) served as the reference standard. We used a dichotomized cutoff for low and high risk of recurrence (≤ 25 melanocytes in an area of 0.5 mm for low risk and > 25 for high risk). Results: The AI model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84 in discriminating margins with low and high recurrence risk. In comparison, the AUC for dermatopathologists ranged from 0.72 to 0.90 and for the residents in pathology, 0.68 to 0.80. Additionally, with aid of the AI model the performance of two pathologists significantly improved. Conclusions: The deep learning showed notable accuracy in detecting resection margins of LM with a high versus low risk of recurrence. Furthermore, the use of AI improved the performance of 2/5 pathologists. This automated tool could aid pathologists in the assessment or pre-screening of LM margins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have shown promise in discriminating between invasive and in situ melanomas. The aim of this study was to analyse how a CNN model, integrating both clinical close-up and dermoscopic images, performed compared with 6 independent dermatologists. The secondary aim was to address which clinical and dermoscopic features dermatologists found to be suggestive of invasive and in situ melanomas, respectively. A retrospective investigation was conducted including 1,578 cases of paired images of invasive (n = 728, 46.1%) and in situ melanomas (n = 850, 53.9%). All images were obtained from the Department of Dermatology and Venereology at Sahlgrenska University Hospital and were randomized to a training set (n = 1,078), a validation set (n = 200) and a test set (n = 300). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) among the dermatologists ranged from 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.70-0.81) to 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.75-0.85). The combined dermatologists' AUC was 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.77-0.86), which was significantly higher than the CNN model (0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.67-0.78, p = 0.001). Three of the dermatologists significantly outperformed the CNN. Shiny white lines, atypical blue-white structures and polymorphous vessels displayed a moderate interobserver agreement, and these features also correlated with invasive melanoma. Prospective trials are needed to address the clinical usefulness of CNN models in this setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]