Prospective multicenter study using artificial intelligence to improve dermoscopic melanoma diagnosis in patient care
-
Published:2024-09-11
Issue:1
Volume:4
Page:
-
ISSN:2730-664X
-
Container-title:Communications Medicine
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Commun Med
Author:
Heinlein LukasORCID, Maron Roman C., Hekler Achim, Haggenmüller Sarah, Wies ChristophORCID, Utikal Jochen S.ORCID, Meier FriedegundORCID, Hobelsberger Sarah, Gellrich Frank F., Sergon Mildred, Hauschild Axel, French Lars E.ORCID, Heinzerling Lucie, Schlager Justin G., Ghoreschi KamranORCID, Schlaak MaxORCID, Hilke Franz J., Poch Gabriela, Korsing Sören, Berking CarolaORCID, Heppt Markus V.ORCID, Erdmann MichaelORCID, Haferkamp Sebastian, Drexler Konstantin, Schadendorf DirkORCID, Sondermann WiebkeORCID, Goebeler MatthiasORCID, Schilling BastianORCID, Krieghoff-Henning Eva, Brinker Titus J.ORCID
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Early detection of melanoma, a potentially lethal type of skin cancer with high prevalence worldwide, improves patient prognosis. In retrospective studies, artificial intelligence (AI) has proven to be helpful for enhancing melanoma detection. However, there are few prospective studies confirming these promising results. Existing studies are limited by low sample sizes, too homogenous datasets, or lack of inclusion of rare melanoma subtypes, preventing a fair and thorough evaluation of AI and its generalizability, a crucial aspect for its application in the clinical setting.
Methods
Therefore, we assessed “All Data are Ext” (ADAE), an established open-source ensemble algorithm for detecting melanomas, by comparing its diagnostic accuracy to that of dermatologists on a prospectively collected, external, heterogeneous test set comprising eight distinct hospitals, four different camera setups, rare melanoma subtypes, and special anatomical sites. We advanced the algorithm with real test-time augmentation (R-TTA, i.e., providing real photographs of lesions taken from multiple angles and averaging the predictions), and evaluated its generalization capabilities.
Results
Overall, the AI shows higher balanced accuracy than dermatologists (0.798, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.779–0.814 vs. 0.781, 95% CI 0.760–0.802; p = 4.0e−145), obtaining a higher sensitivity (0.921, 95% CI 0.900–0.942 vs. 0.734, 95% CI 0.701–0.770; p = 3.3e−165) at the cost of a lower specificity (0.673, 95% CI 0.641–0.702 vs. 0.828, 95% CI 0.804–0.852; p = 3.3e−165).
Conclusion
As the algorithm exhibits a significant performance advantage on our heterogeneous dataset exclusively comprising melanoma-suspicious lesions, AI may offer the potential to support dermatologists, particularly in diagnosing challenging cases.
Funder
Bundesministerium für Gesundheit
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference41 articles.
1. Guy et al. Vital signs: melanoma incidence and mortality trends and projections—United States, 1982-2030. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly Rep. 64, 591–596 (2015). 2. Matthews, N. H., Li, W.-Q., Qureshi, A. A., Weinstock, M. A. & Cho, E. Epidemiology of Melanoma. (Exon Publications; 2017) pp. 3–22. 3. Lens, M. B. & Dawes, M. Global perspectives of contemporary epidemiological trends of cutaneous malignant melanoma. Br. J. Dermatol. 150, 179–185 (2004). 4. Petrie, T., Samatham, R., Witkowski, A. M., Esteva, A. & Leachman, S. A. Melanoma early detection: big data, bigger picture. J. Invest. Dermatol. 139, 25–30 (2019). 5. Rigel, D. S., Russak, J. & Friedman, R. The evolution of melanoma diagnosis: 25 years beyond the ABCDs. CA Cancer J. Clin. 60, 301–316 (2010).
|
|