无创皮肤黑色素瘤排除测试的实际效果:美国多中心登记研究

Mark Kaufmann, M. Skelsey, Laura Ferris, Michael Walker, Andrew Rigby, Burkhard Jansen, Loren Clarke
{"title":"无创皮肤黑色素瘤排除测试的实际效果:美国多中心登记研究","authors":"Mark Kaufmann, M. Skelsey, Laura Ferris, Michael Walker, Andrew Rigby, Burkhard Jansen, Loren Clarke","doi":"10.25251/skin.8.3.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Non-invasive adjuncts to visual assessment of pigmented lesions may reduce biopsies of benign lesions without compromising melanoma detection. A non-invasive genomic melanoma rule-out assay analyzes RNA extracted from stratum corneum cells for PRAME and LINC00518, two genes commonly expressed in melanomas but less often in benign lesions. This study sought to characterize performance of this test in a large patient cohort tested in the real-world clinical setting. \nMethods: The test was applied to suspicious pigmented skin lesions at 63 U.S. dermatology and primary care practices. Test results (positive / negative) were compared to pathology diagnoses (melanoma / not melanoma) for lesions that were biopsied and to follow-up visual examination for those that were monitored. \nResults: Of 19,653 total lesions evaluated, 17,858 (90.87%) tested negative. Biopsy results and / or follow-up examinations were available for 5,096 lesions, with median and mean follow-up duration of 352 and 341 days, respectively. For melanoma, sensitivity was 95.8% and specificity was 69.4%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 13.4%, and NPV was 99.7%. For melanoma and ‘borderline’ lesions combined, sensitivity was 94.2%, specificity was 71.2%, PPV was 20.8%, and NPV was 99.3%. \nConclusion: The results suggest this noninvasive test can facilitate distinction of melanoma from its benign simulators, increasing the proportion of pigmented lesions that can be safely managed with surveillance rather than biopsy and/or excision.","PeriodicalId":22013,"journal":{"name":"SKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real-World Performance of a Noninvasive Cutaneous Melanoma Rule-Out Test: A Multicenter U.S. Registry Study\",\"authors\":\"Mark Kaufmann, M. Skelsey, Laura Ferris, Michael Walker, Andrew Rigby, Burkhard Jansen, Loren Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.25251/skin.8.3.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Non-invasive adjuncts to visual assessment of pigmented lesions may reduce biopsies of benign lesions without compromising melanoma detection. A non-invasive genomic melanoma rule-out assay analyzes RNA extracted from stratum corneum cells for PRAME and LINC00518, two genes commonly expressed in melanomas but less often in benign lesions. This study sought to characterize performance of this test in a large patient cohort tested in the real-world clinical setting. \\nMethods: The test was applied to suspicious pigmented skin lesions at 63 U.S. dermatology and primary care practices. Test results (positive / negative) were compared to pathology diagnoses (melanoma / not melanoma) for lesions that were biopsied and to follow-up visual examination for those that were monitored. \\nResults: Of 19,653 total lesions evaluated, 17,858 (90.87%) tested negative. Biopsy results and / or follow-up examinations were available for 5,096 lesions, with median and mean follow-up duration of 352 and 341 days, respectively. For melanoma, sensitivity was 95.8% and specificity was 69.4%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 13.4%, and NPV was 99.7%. For melanoma and ‘borderline’ lesions combined, sensitivity was 94.2%, specificity was 71.2%, PPV was 20.8%, and NPV was 99.3%. \\nConclusion: The results suggest this noninvasive test can facilitate distinction of melanoma from its benign simulators, increasing the proportion of pigmented lesions that can be safely managed with surveillance rather than biopsy and/or excision.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25251/skin.8.3.8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25251/skin.8.3.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:对色素性病变进行肉眼评估的非侵入性辅助方法可减少良性病变的活检次数,同时又不影响黑色素瘤的检测。一种非侵入性基因组黑色素瘤排除检测方法可分析从角质层细胞中提取的 PRAME 和 LINC00518 RNA,这两种基因通常在黑色素瘤中表达,但在良性病变中较少表达。本研究试图通过在实际临床环境中测试的大型患者群来描述该检测方法的性能。检测方法在美国 63 家皮肤科和初级保健诊所对可疑的色素性皮肤病变进行了检测。将测试结果(阳性/阴性)与活检病变的病理诊断(黑色素瘤/非黑色素瘤)进行比较,并将监测病变的后续肉眼检查结果进行比较。结果共评估了 19,653 个病变,其中 17,858 个(90.87%)检测结果为阴性。有 5,096 个病变的活检结果和/或随访检查结果,随访时间的中位数和平均值分别为 352 天和 341 天。黑色素瘤的敏感性为 95.8%,特异性为 69.4%。阳性预测值(PPV)为 13.4%,NPV 为 99.7%。对于黑色素瘤和 "边缘 "病变,敏感性为 94.2%,特异性为 71.2%,PPV 为 20.8%,NPV 为 99.3%。结论结果表明,这种无创检验有助于区分黑色素瘤及其良性模拟物,从而提高可通过监测而非活检和/或切除术安全处理的色素性病变的比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Real-World Performance of a Noninvasive Cutaneous Melanoma Rule-Out Test: A Multicenter U.S. Registry Study
Introduction: Non-invasive adjuncts to visual assessment of pigmented lesions may reduce biopsies of benign lesions without compromising melanoma detection. A non-invasive genomic melanoma rule-out assay analyzes RNA extracted from stratum corneum cells for PRAME and LINC00518, two genes commonly expressed in melanomas but less often in benign lesions. This study sought to characterize performance of this test in a large patient cohort tested in the real-world clinical setting. Methods: The test was applied to suspicious pigmented skin lesions at 63 U.S. dermatology and primary care practices. Test results (positive / negative) were compared to pathology diagnoses (melanoma / not melanoma) for lesions that were biopsied and to follow-up visual examination for those that were monitored. Results: Of 19,653 total lesions evaluated, 17,858 (90.87%) tested negative. Biopsy results and / or follow-up examinations were available for 5,096 lesions, with median and mean follow-up duration of 352 and 341 days, respectively. For melanoma, sensitivity was 95.8% and specificity was 69.4%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 13.4%, and NPV was 99.7%. For melanoma and ‘borderline’ lesions combined, sensitivity was 94.2%, specificity was 71.2%, PPV was 20.8%, and NPV was 99.3%. Conclusion: The results suggest this noninvasive test can facilitate distinction of melanoma from its benign simulators, increasing the proportion of pigmented lesions that can be safely managed with surveillance rather than biopsy and/or excision.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Off-Label Uses of Upadacitinib Stability of Long-Term Therapeutic Responses to Tralokinumab in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis What Do Clinicians Mean When Submitting a Biopsy as “Rule Out Eczema” Deucravacitinib in Plaque Psoriasis: Maintenance of Response Over 4 Years in the Phase 3 POETYK PSO-1, PSO-2, and LTE Trials Zosteriform Atrophoderma of Pasini and Pierini: A Case Report
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1