S'abonner

Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of three dermoscopic algorithmic methods in the diagnosis of doubtful melanocytic lesions : The importance of light brown structureless areas in differentiating atypical melanocytic nevi from thin melanomas - 12/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/j.jaad.2007.01.014 
Giorgio Annessi, MD a, , Riccardo Bono, MD a, Francesca Sampogna, BD, MPH b, Tullio Faraggiana, MD c, Damiano Abeni, MD, MPH b
a From the Department of Dermatology, Dermoscopy Unit 
b Health Services Research Unit 
c Dermatopathology Unit, Istituto Dermopatico dell’Immacolata, IRCCS 

Reprint requests: Giorgio Annessi, MD, Dept Dermatology, Istituto Dermopatico dell’Immacolata, Via Monti di Creta 104, 00167, Rome, Italy.

Rome, Italy

Abstract

Background

Over the past decade numerous epiluminescence microscopy (ELM) criteria and algorithmic methods have been developed to improve the diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic lesions.

Objective

Our purpose was to compare the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of 3 algorithmic methods (pattern analysis, ABCD rule of dermoscopy, and the 7-point checklist) on a series of highly atypical melanocytic lesions. We also determined the diagnostic value of distinct ELM structures by evaluating their frequency in these lesions.

Methods

A total of 198 consecutive atypical macular melanocytic lesions were studied. ELM assessment was based on the presence or absence of 23 dermoscopic features. Two ELM-experienced dermatologists classified each lesion as benign or malignant using the pattern analysis, the ABCD rule of dermoscopy, and the 7-point checklist method. After surgical excision, 102 lesions were histologically diagnosed as Clark’s nevi and 96 as thin melanomas (TMs) (mean tumor thickness, 0.3 mm). ELM and histologic diagnoses were then compared to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy as well as positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively) for TMs of the 3 algorithmic methods. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine which ELM criteria were most strongly associated with TM.

Results

Of the melanocytic lesions studied, 82.3% were correctly diagnosed by using pattern analysis (85.4% sensitivity, 79.4% specificity, 79.6% PPV, and 70.8% diagnostic accuracy), compared with correct diagnosis of 79.3% (84.4% sensitivity, 74.5% specificity, 75.7% PPV, and 67.8% diagnostic accuracy) and 71.2% (78.1% sensitivity, 64.7% specificity, 67.6% PPV, and 57.7% diagnostic accuracy) with the ABCD and the 7-point checklist methods, respectively. The 7-point checklist yielded the highest number of false-negative results (21.8%) with respect to the ABCD rule (15.6%) and pattern analysis (14.6%). Univariate analysis showed that an atypical pigment network, a pigment network with sharp margins, irregular nonuniform brown globules, a nonuniform pigment distribution, homogeneous areas, and light brown structureless areas were the most sensitive and specific ELM features for TM. A backward stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that the criterion with the strongest TM association was light brown structureless areas (odds ratio = 27.9; 95% confidence interval, 8.6-90.9).

Limitations

The presence and value of light brown structureless areas should also be investigated in clinically nonatypical macular melanocytic lesions.

Conclusion

The pattern analysis method showed the highest sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for TM. Light brown structureless areas were both a statistically significant discriminator and the most reliable predictor of TM (PPV = 93.8%, positive likelihood ratio = 16). Therefore the use of this previously underestimated ELM criterion may not only improve diagnostic performance of equivocal macular melanocytic lesions but also significantly decrease the rate of false-negative results obtained with the 7-point checklist method.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Abbreviations used : AMN, CI, ELM, NPV, OR, PPV, TM


Plan


 Funding sources: None.
Conflicts of interest: None declared.


© 2007  American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 56 - N° 5

P. 759-767 - mai 2007 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • 4th International Workshop for the Study of Itch
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Association between the anatomic distribution of melanoma and sex
  • Lily N. Clark, Daniel B. Shin, Andrea B. Troxel, Shahbaz Khan, Arthur J. Sober, Michael E. Ming

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2025 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.