TY - JOUR
T1 - The performance of SolarScan
T2 - An automated dermoscopy image analysis instrument for the diagnosis of primary melanoma
AU - Menzies, Scott W.
AU - Bischof, Leanne
AU - Talbot, Hugues
AU - Gutenev, Alex
AU - Avramidis, Michelle
AU - Wong, Livian
AU - Lo, Sing Kai
AU - Mackellar, Geoffrey
AU - Skladnev, Victor
AU - McCarthy, William
AU - Kelly, John
AU - Cranney, Brad
AU - Lye, Peter
AU - Rabinovitz, Harold
AU - Oliviero, Margaret
AU - Blum, Andreas
AU - Virol, Alexandra
AU - De'Ambrosis, Brian
AU - McCleod, Roderick
AU - Koga, Hiroshi
AU - Grin, Caron
AU - Braun, Ralph
AU - Johr, Robert
PY - 2005/11
Y1 - 2005/11
N2 - Objective: To describe the diagnostic performance of SolarScan (Polartechnics Ltd, Sydney, Australia), an automated instrument for the diagnosis of primary melanoma. Design: Images from a data set of 2430 lesions (382 were melanomas; median Breslow thickness, 0.36 mm) were divided into a training set and an independent test set at a ratio of approximately 2:1. A diagnostic algorithm (absolute diagnosis of melanoma vs benign lesion and estimated probability of melanoma) was developed and its performance described on the test set. High-quality clinical and dermoscopy images with a detailed patient history for 78 lesions (13 of which were melanomas) from the test set were given to various clinicians to compare their diagnostic accuracy with that of SolarScan. Setting: Seven specialist referral centers and 2 general practice skin cancer clinics from 3 continents. Comparison between clinician diagnosis and SolarScan diagnosis was by 3 dermoscopy experts, 4 dermatologists, 3 trainee dermatologists, and 3 general practitioners. Patients: Images of the melanocytic lesions were obtained from patients who required either excision or digital monitoring to exclude malignancy. Main Outcome Measures: Sensitivity, specificity, the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, median probability for the diagnosis of melanoma, a direct comparison of SolarScan with diagnoses performed by humans, and interinstrument and intrainstrument reproducibility. Results: The melanocytic-only diagnostic model was highly reproducible in the test set and gave a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-96%) and specificity of 68% (95% CI, 64%-72%) for melanoma. SolarScan had comparable or superior sensitivity and specificity (85% vs 65%) compared with those of experts (90% vs 59%), dermatologists (81% vs 60%), trainees (85% vs 36%; P=.06), and general practitioners (62% vs 63%). The intraclass correlation coefficient of intrainstrument repeatability was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88), indicating an excellent repeatability. There was no significant interinstrument variation (P=.80). Conclusions: SolarScan is a robust diagnostic instrument for pigmented or partially pigmented melanocytic lesions of the skin. Preliminary data suggest that its performance is comparable or superior to that of a range of clinician groups. However, these findings should be confirmed in a formal clinical trial.
AB - Objective: To describe the diagnostic performance of SolarScan (Polartechnics Ltd, Sydney, Australia), an automated instrument for the diagnosis of primary melanoma. Design: Images from a data set of 2430 lesions (382 were melanomas; median Breslow thickness, 0.36 mm) were divided into a training set and an independent test set at a ratio of approximately 2:1. A diagnostic algorithm (absolute diagnosis of melanoma vs benign lesion and estimated probability of melanoma) was developed and its performance described on the test set. High-quality clinical and dermoscopy images with a detailed patient history for 78 lesions (13 of which were melanomas) from the test set were given to various clinicians to compare their diagnostic accuracy with that of SolarScan. Setting: Seven specialist referral centers and 2 general practice skin cancer clinics from 3 continents. Comparison between clinician diagnosis and SolarScan diagnosis was by 3 dermoscopy experts, 4 dermatologists, 3 trainee dermatologists, and 3 general practitioners. Patients: Images of the melanocytic lesions were obtained from patients who required either excision or digital monitoring to exclude malignancy. Main Outcome Measures: Sensitivity, specificity, the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, median probability for the diagnosis of melanoma, a direct comparison of SolarScan with diagnoses performed by humans, and interinstrument and intrainstrument reproducibility. Results: The melanocytic-only diagnostic model was highly reproducible in the test set and gave a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-96%) and specificity of 68% (95% CI, 64%-72%) for melanoma. SolarScan had comparable or superior sensitivity and specificity (85% vs 65%) compared with those of experts (90% vs 59%), dermatologists (81% vs 60%), trainees (85% vs 36%; P=.06), and general practitioners (62% vs 63%). The intraclass correlation coefficient of intrainstrument repeatability was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88), indicating an excellent repeatability. There was no significant interinstrument variation (P=.80). Conclusions: SolarScan is a robust diagnostic instrument for pigmented or partially pigmented melanocytic lesions of the skin. Preliminary data suggest that its performance is comparable or superior to that of a range of clinician groups. However, these findings should be confirmed in a formal clinical trial.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=27944465368&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=27944465368&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1001/archderm.141.11.1388
DO - 10.1001/archderm.141.11.1388
M3 - Article
C2 - 16301386
AN - SCOPUS:27944465368
SN - 2168-6068
VL - 141
SP - 1388
EP - 1396
JO - Archives of Dermatology
JF - Archives of Dermatology
IS - 11
ER -