Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2022 Jul 1;158(7):754-761.
doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.1570.

Effect of Reflectance Confocal Microscopy for Suspect Lesions on Diagnostic Accuracy in Melanoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Giovanni Pellacani  1   2 , Francesca Farnetani  1 , Silvana Ciardo  1 , Johanna Chester  1   3 , Shaniko Kaleci  3 , Laura Mazzoni  4 , Sara Bassoli  1 , Alice Casari  1 , Riccardo Pampena  1   4 , Marica Mirra  5 , Michela Lai  1   5 , Serena Magi  4 , Victor D Mandel  4 , Sergio Di Matteo  6 , Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo  7 , Ignazio Stanganelli  4   8 , Caterina Longo  1   5
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of Reflectance Confocal Microscopy for Suspect Lesions on Diagnostic Accuracy in Melanoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Giovanni Pellacani et al. JAMA Dermatol. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Importance: Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have concluded that given data paucity, a comparison of reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) with dermoscopy is complex. They recommend comparative prospective studies in a real-world setting of suspect lesions.

Objective: To test the hypothesis that RCM reduces unnecessary lesion excision by more than 30% and identifies all melanoma lesions thicker than 0.5 mm at baseline.

Design, setting, and participants: This randomized clinical trial included 3165 patients enrolled from 3 dermatology referral centers in Italy between January 2017 and December 2019, with a mean (SD) follow-up of 9.6 (6.9) months (range, 1.9-37.0 months). The consecutive sample of 3165 suspect lesions determined through dermoscopy were eligible for inclusion (10 patients refused). Diagnostic analysis included 3078 patients (48 lost, 39 refused excision). Data were analyzed between April and September 2021.

Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to standard therapeutic care (clinical and dermoscopy evaluation) with or without adjunctive RCM. Information available guided prospective clinical decision-making (excision or follow-up).

Main outcomes and measures: Hypotheses were defined prior to study initiation. All lesions excised (baseline and follow-up) were registered, including histopathological diagnoses/no change at dermoscopy follow-up (with or without adjunctive RCM). Number needed to excise (total number of excised lesions/number of melanomas) and Breslow thickness of delayed diagnosed melanomas were calculated based on real-life, prospective, clinical decision-making.

Results: Among the 3165 participants, 1608 (50.8%) were male, and mean (SD) age was 49.3 (14.9) years. When compared with standard therapeutic care only, adjunctive RCM was associated with a higher positive predictive value (18.9 vs 33.3), lower benign to malignant ratio (3.7:1.0 vs 1.8:1.0), and a number needed to excise reduction of 43.4% (5.3 vs 3.0). All lesions (n = 15) with delayed melanoma diagnoses were thinner than 0.5 mm.

Conclusions and relevance: This randomized clinical trial shows that adjunctive use of RCM for suspect lesions reduces unnecessary excisions and assures the removal of aggressive melanomas at baseline in a real-life, clinical decision-making application for referral centers with RCM.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04789421.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. CONSORT Flow Diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Moloney FJ, Guitera P, Coates E, et al. . Detection of primary melanoma in individuals at extreme high risk: a prospective 5-year follow-up study. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150(8):819-827. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.514 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Argenziano G, Soyer HP. Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions—a valuable tool for early diagnosis of melanoma. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2(7):443-449. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(00)00422-8 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Xiong YQ, Ma SJ, Mo Y, Huo ST, Wen YQ, Chen Q. Comparison of dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy for the diagnosis of malignant skin tumours: a meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2017;143(9):1627-1635. doi:10.1007/s00432-017-2391-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Braga JC, Scope A, Klaz I, et al. . The significance of reflectance confocal microscopy in the assessment of solitary pink skin lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;61(2):230-241. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2009.02.036 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Argenziano G, Cerroni L, Zalaudek I, et al. . Accuracy in melanoma detection: a 10-year multicenter survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67(1):54-59. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2011.07.019 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data