Melanomscreening

Die Inzidenz von Melanomen ist in den letzten Jahrzehnten stark angestiegen, während die Mortalität niedrig geblieben ist [1]. Dies hat weltweit zu Diskussionen über mögliche Ursachen geführt. Als wahrscheinlichste Ursache wird von einigen Autoren eine Überdiagnose aufgrund einer niedrigeren Hemmschwelle für Biopsien/Exzisionen pigmentierter Läsionen und die Einstufung morphologischer Veränderungen als Melanom angesehen [1]. Dieser Artikel gibt einen Überblick über die Situation, die Empfehlungen sowie die Rolle von Technologie und künstlicher Intelligenz.

Schlüsselwörter

Hautkrebsscreening - Melanom - Melanomscreening - Dermatoskopie - sequentielle digitale Dermatoskopie - Augmented Intelligence

• Literatur

• 1 Welch HG, Mazer BL, Adamson AS. The Rapid Rise in Cutaneous Melanoma Diagnoses. N Eng J Med 2021; 384 (01) 72-79
• 2 Garbe C, Amaral T, Peris K. et al. European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 1: Diagnostics: Update 2022. Eur Journal Cancer 2022; 170: 236-255
• 3 Tatzmann T, Schoffer O, Meier F. et al. Are patients benefiting from participation in the German skin cancer screening programme? A large cohort study based on administrative data. Br J Dermatol 2022; 186 (01) 69-77
• 4 Breitbart EW, Waldmann A, Nolte S. et al. Systematic skin cancer screening in Northern Germany. J Am Acad Dermatol 2012; 66 (02) 201-211
• 5 Eisemann N, Waldmann A, Katalinic A. Incidence of melanoma and changes in stage-specific incidence after implementation of skin cancer screening in Schleswig-Holstein. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2014; 57 (01) 77-83
• 6 Schumann L, Eisemann N, Augustin J. et al. Association of early-stage incidence and mortality in malignant melanoma – a population-based ecological study. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2023; 21 (Suppl. 05) 33-40
• 7 Hübner J, Augustin M, Augustin J. et al. Evaluation der Hautkrebsfrüherkennung in Deutschland mit Krebsregisterdaten – Herausforderungen, Lösungen und aktuelle Trends. JJ Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2023; 21 (Suppl. 05) 13-21
• 8 Garbe C, Augustin M, Augustin J. et al. Evaluation der Hautkrebsfrüherkennung in Deutschland – Teilnahme, Tumordetektion und Intervalltumoren auf Grundlage von GKV-Daten. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2023; 21 (Suppl. 05) 3-12
• 9 Matsumoto M, Wack S, Weinstock MA. et al. Five-Year Outcomes of a Melanoma Screening Initiative in a Large Health Care System. JAMA Dermatology 2022; 158 (05) 504-512
• 10 Smith B, Matsumoto M, Wang H. et al. Melanoma Detection in Alaska Native, American Indian, Asian, Black, Hispanic, and Pacific Islander Patients in a Large Skin Cancer Screening Initiative. JAMA Dermatol 2023; 159 (09) 1004-1006
• 11 Whiteman DC, Olsen CM, MacGregor S. et al. The effect of screening on melanoma incidence and biopsy rates. Br J Dermatol 2022; 187 (04) 515-522
• 12 Garbe C, Büttner P, Weiss J. et al. Associated factors in the prevalence of more than 50 common melanocytic nevi, atypical melanocytic nevi, and actinic lentigines: multicenter case-control study of the Central Malignant Melanoma Registry of the German Dermatological Society. J Invest Dermatol 1994; 102 (05) 700-705
• 13 de Snoo FA, Kroon MW, Bergman W. et al. From sporadic atypical nevi to familial melanoma: risk analysis for melanoma in sporadic atypical nevus patients. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007; 56 (05) 748-752
• 14 Stefanaki C, Chardalias L, Doura E. et al. Paediatric melanoma. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2017; 31 (10) 1604-1615
• 15 Saginala K, Barsouk A, Aluru JS. et al. Epidemiology of Melanoma. Med Sci (Basel) 2021; 9 (04) 63
• 16 Tsao H, Olazagasti JM, Cordoro MK. et al. Early detection of melanoma: reviewing the ABCDEs. J Am Acad Dermatol 2015; 72 (04) 717-723
• 17 Gaudy-Marqueste C, Wazaefi Y, Bruneu Y. et al. Ugly Duckling Sign as a Major Factor of Efficiency in Melanoma Detection. JAMA Dermatol 2017; 153 (04) 279-284
• 18 Young AT, Vora NB, Cortez J. et al. The role of technology in melanoma screening and diagnosis. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 2021; 34 (02) 288-300
• 19 Dinnes J, Deeks JJ, Chuchu N. et al. Dermoscopy, with and without visual inspection, for diagnosing melanoma in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 12 (12) CD011902
• 20 Haenssle HA, Fink C, Toberer J. et al. Man against machine reloaded: performance of a market-approved convolutional neural network in classifying a broad spectrum of skin lesions in comparison with 96 dermatologists working under less artificial conditions. Ann Oncol 2020; 31 (01) 137-143
• 21 Haenssle HA, Fink C, Schneiderbauer R. et al. Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists. Ann Oncol 2018; 29 (08) 1836-1842
• 22 Cerminara SE, Cheng P, Kosnter L. et al. Diagnostic performance of augmented intelligence with 2D and 3D total body photography and convolutional neural networks in a high-risk population for melanoma under real-world conditions: A new era of skin cancer screening?. Eur J Cancer 2023; 190: 112954
• 23 Goessinger EV, Cerminara SE, Mueller AM. et al. Consistency of convolutional neural networks in dermoscopic melanoma recognition: A prospective real-world study about the pitfalls of augmented intelligence. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2023;
• 24 Goessinger EV, Niederfeilner JC, Cerminara S. et al. Patient and dermatologists' perspectives on augmented intelligence for melanoma screening: A prospective study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2024;
• 25 Jahn AS, Navarini AA, Cerminara SE. et al. Over-Detection of Melanoma-Suspect Lesions by a CE-Certified Smartphone App: Performance in Comparison to Dermatologists, 2D and 3D Convolutional Neural Networks in a Prospective Data Set of 1204 Pigmented Skin Lesions Involving Patients’ Perception. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14 (15) 3829
• 26 Freeman K, Dinnes J, Chuchu N. et al. Algorithm based smartphone apps to assess risk of skin cancer in adults: systematic review of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMJ 2020; 368: m127