0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Research Letter |

Lesion Selection by Melanoma High-Risk Consumers During Skin Self-examination Using Mobile Teledermoscopy FREE

Monika Janda, PhD1; Lois J. Loescher, PhD2; Parastoo Banan, MD3; Caitlin Horsham, BHlthSc1; H. Peter Soyer, MD3
[+] Author Affiliations
1School of Public Health, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
2College of Nursing, The University of Arizona, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, and Skin Cancer Institute, Tucson
3Dermatology Research Center, The University of Queensland, School of Medicine, Translational Research Institute, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150(6):656-658. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7743.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Mobile teledermatoscopy (MTD) for the early detection of skin cancer uses smartphones with dermatoscope attachments to magnify, capture, and transfer images remotely.1 Using the asymmetry–color variation (AC) rule, consumers achieve dermoscopy sensitivity of 92.9% to 94.0% and specificity of 62.0% to 64.2% for melanoma.2

This pilot randomized trial assessed lesions of concern selected by consumers at high risk of melanoma using MTD plus the AC rule (intervention, n = 10) or the AC rule alone (control, n = 12) during skin self-examination (SSE). Also measured were lesion location patterns, lesions overlooked by participants, provisional clinical diagnoses, likelihood of malignant tumor, and participant pressure to excise lesions.

Ethics approval, informed consent, and intervention group (n = 10) characteristics were described previously.1 All participants were provided with an AC rule fact sheet and standardized SSE instructions. Participants underwent clinical skin examinations (CSEs) 3 to 6 months after SSEs to assess lesions of concern found during SSE and additional lesions potentially overlooked.

Participants’ characteristics were similar in the intervention and control groups: overall, 60% male; working full time, 68%; personal history of melanoma, 73%; and body areas with moles, 59%. During SSE, 107 lesions were identified (66 in the intervention group and 41 in the control group; Figure, A), with patterns of body lesion locations similar for both groups. Figure, B and C, compares lesions identified during SSE and provisional clinical diagnosis during CSE. Likelihood of malignant tumor and pressure by participants to excise lesions during CSE are listed in the Table. Forty-two additional lesions not pointed out by participants were noted during CSE (20 in the intervention group and 22 in the control group), including 1 clinically presenting as melanoma (dysplastic nevus), 2 basal cell carcinomas (1 confirmed in the intervention group and 1 resolved before surgery in the control group), and 1 squamous cell carcinoma (confirmed in the intervention group) (Table). On average, participants’ SSE in both groups missed 2 lesions (intervention median [SD], 2 [1.43]; control median [SD], 2.09 [0.93]).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Lesion Location

A, Lesions of concern (based on the asymmetry–color variation [AC] rule) noted by intervention group (blue) and control group (green) during home skin self-examination (SSE). B, Lesions of concern (based on the AC rule) noted by the intervention group during home SSE (blue) and locations or provisional diagnosis of lesions noted by the dermatologist during clinical skin examination (CSE) (red). C, Lesions of concern (based on the AC rule) noted by the control group during home SSE (green) and locations or provisional diagnosis of lesions noted by the dermatologist during CSE (orange). Lesion provisional diagnoses in panel B (red) and panel C (orange) included dysplastic nevus, benign nevus, solar lentigo, seborrheic keratosis, angioma, diagnosis not possible, basal cell carcinoma, solar keratosis, dermatofibroma, melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and skin graft or scar.

Graphic Jump Location
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable.  Clinical Skin Examination Findings and Dermatologist Diagnoses of Lesions

Consumer-selected lesions were unlikely to be malignant, although more than one-third were dysplastic nevi. During CSE, the dermatologist detected other higher-priority skin lesions. These lesions were in hard-to-see body areas and might have been missed during SSE.

Participants in both groups selected lesion locations that reflect the SSE primary body areas (arms, face, and front of legs) reported by Mujumdar et al.3 Both groups also selected lesions on the back, shoulders, and legs, reflecting findings by Carli et al.4 Our participants did not select lesions in sexually sensitive5 or harder-to-see areas.

Previously, Boone et al5 found a lower proportion of missed lesions in partner-assisted compared with unassisted SSEs. We instructed participants to select 3 to 5 lesions during SSE, which may have contributed to participants missing lesions and explain some discrepancies between participant and dermatologist assessment.

Future studies need to instruct participants to also submit location photographs of lesions to aid re-identification during CSE. Consumers with many moles, such as participants in this study, may find it difficult to discriminate lesions of concern. Such individuals benefit from regularly scheduled CSEs; however, between visits they could use MTD to follow specific lesions designated by the dermatologist. More research is needed on the interface of MTD with cognitive processes to select lesions of concern. Factual knowledge is gained from the AC rule, but knowledge alone may not allow discrimination between benign and malignant skin lesions.6

Future studies of MTD could benefit from targeting partner-assisted SSEs, increasing the number of SSEs to generate more lesions submitted for telediagnosis, assessing the effect of dermatologists’ feedback between SSE rounds, and submitting lesion location photographs. The process of lesion selection decision making using MTD or other lesion selection aids merits further investigation.

Corresponding Author: Monika Janda, PhD, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Rd, Kelvin Grove, QLD 4061, Brisbane, Australia (m.janda@qut.edu.au).

Accepted for Publication: August 22, 2013.

Published Online: February 12, 2014. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7743.

Author Contributions: Drs Janda and Soyer had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: Janda, Loescher, Soyer.

Acquisition of data: Janda, Banan, Soyer, Horsham.

Analysis and interpretation of data: Janda, Loescher, Horsham, Soyer.

Drafting of the manuscript: Janda, Loescher, Horsham.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Janda.

Obtained funding: Janda, Soyer.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Janda, Banan, Horsham.

Study supervision: Janda, Soyer.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Soyer is a cofounder and shareholder of e-derm-consult GmbH and is a shareholder and reports for MoleMap by Dermatologists Pty Ltd. No other disclosures were reported.

Funding/Support: This study was supported in part by Queensland University of Technology Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation and National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Career Development Fellowship 1045247 (Dr Janda). Dr Soyer holds a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Practitioner Fellowship 1020145.

Role of the Sponsor: The funding source had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Janda  M, Loescher  LJ, Soyer  HP.  Enhanced skin self-examination: a novel approach to skin cancer monitoring and follow-up. JAMA Dermatol. 2013;149(2):231-236.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Luttrell  MJ, McClenahan  P, Hofmann-Wellenhof  R, Fink-Puches  R, Soyer  HP.  Laypersons’ sensitivity for melanoma identification is higher with dermoscopy images than clinical photographs. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167(5):1037-1041.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mujumdar  UJ, Hay  JL, Monroe-Hinds  YC,  et al.  Sun protection and skin self-examination in melanoma survivors. Psychooncology. 2009;18(10):1106-1115.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Carli  P, De Giorgi  V, Palli  D,  et al.  Self-detected cutaneous melanomas in Italian patients. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2004;29(6):593-596.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Boone  SL, Stapleton  J, Turrisi  R, Ortiz  S, Robinson  JK, Mallett  KA.  Thoroughness of skin examination by melanoma patients: influence of age, sex and partner. Australas J Dermatol. 2009;50(3):176-180.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hanrahan  PF, Hersey  P, D'Este  C.  Factors involved in presentation of older people with thick melanoma. Med J Aust. 1998;169(8):410-414.

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Lesion Location

A, Lesions of concern (based on the asymmetry–color variation [AC] rule) noted by intervention group (blue) and control group (green) during home skin self-examination (SSE). B, Lesions of concern (based on the AC rule) noted by the intervention group during home SSE (blue) and locations or provisional diagnosis of lesions noted by the dermatologist during clinical skin examination (CSE) (red). C, Lesions of concern (based on the AC rule) noted by the control group during home SSE (green) and locations or provisional diagnosis of lesions noted by the dermatologist during CSE (orange). Lesion provisional diagnoses in panel B (red) and panel C (orange) included dysplastic nevus, benign nevus, solar lentigo, seborrheic keratosis, angioma, diagnosis not possible, basal cell carcinoma, solar keratosis, dermatofibroma, melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and skin graft or scar.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable.  Clinical Skin Examination Findings and Dermatologist Diagnoses of Lesions

References

Janda  M, Loescher  LJ, Soyer  HP.  Enhanced skin self-examination: a novel approach to skin cancer monitoring and follow-up. JAMA Dermatol. 2013;149(2):231-236.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Luttrell  MJ, McClenahan  P, Hofmann-Wellenhof  R, Fink-Puches  R, Soyer  HP.  Laypersons’ sensitivity for melanoma identification is higher with dermoscopy images than clinical photographs. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167(5):1037-1041.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mujumdar  UJ, Hay  JL, Monroe-Hinds  YC,  et al.  Sun protection and skin self-examination in melanoma survivors. Psychooncology. 2009;18(10):1106-1115.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Carli  P, De Giorgi  V, Palli  D,  et al.  Self-detected cutaneous melanomas in Italian patients. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2004;29(6):593-596.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Boone  SL, Stapleton  J, Turrisi  R, Ortiz  S, Robinson  JK, Mallett  KA.  Thoroughness of skin examination by melanoma patients: influence of age, sex and partner. Australas J Dermatol. 2009;50(3):176-180.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hanrahan  PF, Hersey  P, D'Este  C.  Factors involved in presentation of older people with thick melanoma. Med J Aust. 1998;169(8):410-414.

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

503 Views
4 Citations

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Melanoma

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Make the Diagnosis: Melanoma

×