Patients poorly recognize lesions of concern that are malignant melanomas: is self-screening the correct advice?
Artificial Intelligence
Basal cell carcinoma
Malignant melanoma
Prevention
Screening
Skin cancer
Skin neoplasm
Squamous cell carcinoma
Ultraviolet radiation
Journal
PeerJ
ISSN: 2167-8359
Titre abrégé: PeerJ
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101603425
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2024
2024
Historique:
received:
28
11
2023
accepted:
12
06
2024
medline:
8
7
2024
pubmed:
8
7
2024
entrez:
8
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Australia is known for its outdoor culture, with a large percentage of its population engaging in outdoor recreational activities, aquatic, non-aquatic and outdoor occupational activities. However, these outdoor enthusiasts face increased exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR), leading to a higher risk of skin cancer, including malignant melanoma (MM). Over the past 40 years, there has been a significant rise in skin cancer rates in Australia, with two out of three Australians expected to develop some form of skin cancer by age 70. Currently, skin cancer examinations are not endorsed in asymptomatic or low-risk individuals in Australia, with only high-risk individuals recommended to undergo regular skin examinations. Notably, the Melanoma Institute Australia suggests that one-half of patients identify MMs themselves, although this claim appears to be based on limited Australian data which may not reflect contemporary practice. Therefore this study sought to determine the percentage of patients who were able to self-identify MMs as lesions of concern when presenting for a skin cancer examination. Multi-site, cross-sectional study design incorporating a descriptive survey and total body skin cancer screening, including artificial intelligence by a skin cancer doctor. A total of 260 participants with suspect MM lesions were biopsied, with 83 (31.9%) found to be melanomas. Of the true positive MMs only a small percentage of participants (21.7% specificity) correctly had concerns about the suspect lesion being a MM. These MMs were located primarily on the back (44.4%), shoulder (11.1%) and upper leg (11.1%). There was no significant difference in the size between those participants aware of a MM versus those who were not ( Only a small percentage of participants in this study were able to self-identify either
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Australia is known for its outdoor culture, with a large percentage of its population engaging in outdoor recreational activities, aquatic, non-aquatic and outdoor occupational activities. However, these outdoor enthusiasts face increased exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR), leading to a higher risk of skin cancer, including malignant melanoma (MM). Over the past 40 years, there has been a significant rise in skin cancer rates in Australia, with two out of three Australians expected to develop some form of skin cancer by age 70. Currently, skin cancer examinations are not endorsed in asymptomatic or low-risk individuals in Australia, with only high-risk individuals recommended to undergo regular skin examinations. Notably, the Melanoma Institute Australia suggests that one-half of patients identify MMs themselves, although this claim appears to be based on limited Australian data which may not reflect contemporary practice. Therefore this study sought to determine the percentage of patients who were able to self-identify MMs as lesions of concern when presenting for a skin cancer examination.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Multi-site, cross-sectional study design incorporating a descriptive survey and total body skin cancer screening, including artificial intelligence by a skin cancer doctor.
Results
UNASSIGNED
A total of 260 participants with suspect MM lesions were biopsied, with 83 (31.9%) found to be melanomas. Of the true positive MMs only a small percentage of participants (21.7% specificity) correctly had concerns about the suspect lesion being a MM. These MMs were located primarily on the back (44.4%), shoulder (11.1%) and upper leg (11.1%). There was no significant difference in the size between those participants aware of a MM versus those who were not (
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Only a small percentage of participants in this study were able to self-identify either
Identifiants
pubmed: 38974412
doi: 10.7717/peerj.17674
pii: 17674
pmc: PMC11227272
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e17674Informations de copyright
©2024 Climstein et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
A/Prof Mike Climstein is a Section Editor for PeerJ (Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation); A/Prof Michael Stapelberg and Ian Miller are employed at John Flynn Hospital Specialist Centre; A/Prof Jeremy Hudson and Dr Paul Coxon are employed at North Queensland Skin Centre; Joe Walsh in employed at Sports Science Institute and AI Consulting Group.