Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) targeting immune checkpoint pathways such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death 1 (PD-1) may confer durable disease control in several malignancies. In some patients, immune checkpoint mAb cause cutaneous immune-related adverse events. Although the most commonly reported cutaneous toxicities are mild, a subset may persist despite therapy and can lead to severe or life-threatening toxicity. Autoimmune blistering disorders are not commonly associated with immune checkpoint mAb therapy. We report a case series of patients who developed bullous pemphigoid (BP), an autoimmune process classically attributed to pathologic autoantibody formation and complement deposition. Three patients were identified. Two patients developed BP while receiving the anti-PD-1 mAb nivolumab, and one while receiving the anti-PD-L1 mAb durvalumab. The clinicopathologic features of each patient and rash, and corresponding radiologic findings at the development of the rash and after its treatment, are described. Patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAb may develop immune-related bullous pemphigoid. This may be related to both T-cell and B-cell mediated responses. Referral to dermatology for accurate diagnosis and management is recommended.
Deep learning computer vision systems classified melanoma dermoscopy images with accuracy that exceeded some but not all dermatologists.
Background: Melanoma incidence and mortality is a growing concern. Better recognition and management of skin cancer by primary care providers (PCPs) could help, but studies suggest they would benefit from additional education. Effective educational programs are needed.Methods: We developed and conducted a voluntary before-and-after evaluation of a 1-to 2-hour interactive, web-based course in skin cancer detection for practicing, board-certified PCPs (http:// www.skinsight.com/info/for_professionals/dermatology-education-resources). Voluntary participants' ability to diagnose and manage skin cancer was assessed using pretests, immediate tests, and 6-month posttests. The effect on actual practice patterns was assessed using participants' patient panels: referrals or visits to dermatology and skin biopsies during the 6 months after the course were compared with those during the same period before the course.Results: The mean age of the 54 participants was 50.5 years (standard deviation, 11.1); 54% were women and 52% were Asian. The mean score for appropriate diagnosis and management increased from 36.1% to 46.7% (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4 -1.9), with greatest improvement in benign lesions, from 32.1% to 46.3% (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.6 -2.4). Dermatology referrals for suspicious lesions or new visits by participants' patients decreased at both sites after the course (from 630 to 607 and from 726 to 266, respectively).Conclusions: This course improved skills in practicing PCPs. Improvement was greatest in the diagnosis and appropriate management of benign lesions and dermatology utilization decreased. (J Am Board Fam Med 2013;26:648 -657.)
BACKGROUND: Early detection of melanoma may provide an opportunity to positively impact melanoma mortality. Numerous skin cancer educational interventions have been developed for primary care physicians (PCPs) to improve diagnostic accuracy. Standardized training is also a prerequisite for formal testing of melanoma screening in the primary care setting. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to determine the extent of evaluated interventions designed to educate PCPs about skin cancer, including melanoma. DESIGN: Relevant studies in the English language were identified through systemic searches performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane through December 2010. Supplementary information was obtained from corresponding authors of the included studies when necessary. APPROACH: Studies eligible for inclusion formally evaluated skin cancer education interventions and were designed primarily for PCPs. Excluded studies lacked a specified training intervention, used decision-making software, focused solely on risk factor identification, or did not directly educate or assess participants. Twenty studies met the selection criteria. Data were extracted according to intervention content and delivery format, and study outcomes.KEY RESULTS: All interventions included instructions about skin cancer diagnosis, but otherwise varied in content. Curricula utilized six distinct educational techniques, usually incorporating more than one. Intervention duration varied from 12 min to over 6 h. Eight of the 20 studies were randomized trials. Most studies (18/20, 90%) found a significant improvement in at least one of the following five outcome categories: knowledge, competence, confidence, diagnostic performance, or systems outcomes. Competence was most commonly measured; no study evaluated all categories. Variability in study design, interventions, and outcome measures prevented correlation of outcomes with intervention characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the development of many isolated educational interventions, few have been tested rigorously or evaluated under sufficient standardized conditions to allow for quantitative comparison. Improved and rigorously tested skin cancer educational interventions for PCPs with outcome measures focusing on changes in performance are needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.