Center for Melanoma Research and Treatment, California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco.
Departments of Dermatology and Family Medicine, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
JAMA Dermatol. 2023 May 1;159(5):545-553. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2023.0127.
Therapy for advanced melanoma has transformed during the past decade, but early detection and prognostic assessment of cutaneous melanoma (CM) remain paramount goals. Best practices for screening and use of pigmented lesion evaluation tools and gene expression profile (GEP) testing in CM remain to be defined.
To provide consensus recommendations on optimal screening practices and prebiopsy diagnostic, postbiopsy diagnostic, and prognostic assessment of CM.
Case scenarios were interrogated using a modified Delphi consensus method. Melanoma panelists (n = 60) were invited to vote on hypothetical scenarios via an emailed survey (n = 42), which was followed by a consensus conference (n = 51) that reviewed the literature and the rationale for survey answers. Panelists participated in a follow-up survey for final recommendations on the scenarios (n = 45).
The panelists reached consensus (≥70% agreement) in supporting a risk-stratified approach to melanoma screening in clinical settings and public screening events, screening personnel recommendations (self/partner, primary care provider, general dermatologist, and pigmented lesion expert), screening intervals, and acceptable appointment wait times. Participants also reached consensus that visual and dermoscopic examination are sufficient for evaluation and follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions deemed innocuous. The panelists reached consensus on interpreting reflectance confocal microscopy and some but not all results from epidermal tape stripping, but they did not reach consensus on use of certain pigmented lesion evaluation tools, such as electrical impedance spectroscopy. Regarding GEP scores, the panelists reached consensus that a low-risk prognostic GEP score should not outweigh concerning histologic features when selecting patients to undergo sentinel lymph node biopsy but did not reach consensus on imaging recommendations in the setting of a high-risk prognostic GEP score and low-risk histology and/or negative nodal status.
For this consensus statement, panelists reached consensus on aspects of a risk-stratified approach to melanoma screening and follow-up as well as use of visual examination and dermoscopy. These findings support a practical approach to diagnosing and evaluating CM. Panelists did not reach consensus on a clearly defined role for GEP testing in clinical decision-making, citing the need for additional studies to establish the clinical use of existing GEP assays.
在过去十年中,晚期黑色素瘤的治疗已经发生了转变,但早期发现和预测皮肤黑色素瘤 (CM) 的预后仍然是最重要的目标。在 CM 中,筛查的最佳实践以及色素性病变评估工具和基因表达谱 (GEP) 检测的使用仍有待确定。
提供关于 CM 最佳筛查实践以及活检前、活检后诊断和预后评估的共识建议。
使用改良 Delphi 共识方法对病例进行了审查。黑色素瘤小组成员(n=60)通过电子邮件调查对假设情况进行了投票(n=42),随后进行了共识会议(n=51),审查了文献和调查答案的基本原理。小组成员参加了关于这些情况的最终建议的后续调查(n=45)。
小组成员就支持在临床环境和公共筛查活动中对黑色素瘤进行风险分层筛查、筛查人员建议(自我/伴侣、初级保健提供者、普通皮肤科医生和色素性病变专家)、筛查间隔和可接受的预约等待时间达成了共识(≥70%的一致性)。参与者还就视觉和皮肤镜检查足以评估和随访被认为无害的黑素细胞皮肤病变达成了共识。小组成员就反射共聚焦显微镜和表皮胶带剥离的一些但不是所有结果的解释达成了共识,但他们在某些色素性病变评估工具的使用上没有达成共识,例如电阻抗光谱。关于 GEP 评分,小组成员达成共识,低风险预后 GEP 评分不应在选择接受前哨淋巴结活检的患者时超过令人担忧的组织学特征,但在高风险预后 GEP 评分和低风险组织学和/或阴性淋巴结状态的情况下,他们对成像建议没有达成共识。
对于这项共识声明,小组成员就黑色素瘤筛查和随访的风险分层方法以及视觉检查和皮肤镜检查的使用达成了共识。这些发现支持了诊断和评估 CM 的实用方法。小组成员在 GEP 检测在临床决策中的明确作用上没有达成共识,他们引用了需要进一步研究来建立现有 GEP 检测的临床用途。