IMPORTANCE Melanoma in situ (MIS) is increasing in incidence, and expert consensus opinion recommends surgical excision for therapeutic management. Currently, wide local excision (WLE) is the standard of care. However, Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is now used to treat a growing subset of individuals with MIS. During MMS, unlike WLE, the entire cutaneous surgical margin is evaluated intraoperatively for tumor cells.OBJECTIVE To assess the outcomes of patients with MIS treated with MMS compared with those treated with WLE. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective review of a prospective database. The study cohort consisted of 662 patients with MIS treated with MMS or WLE per standard of care in dermatology and surgery (general surgery, otolaryngology, plastics, oculoplastics, surgical oncology) at an academic tertiary care referral center from January 1, 1978, to December 31, 2013, with follow-up through 2015. EXPOSURE Mohs micrographic surgery or WLE. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Recurrence, overall survival, and melanoma-specific survival. RESULTS There were 277 patients treated with MMS (mean [SD] age, 64.0 [13.1] years; 62.1% male) and 385 treated with WLE (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [15.6] years; P < .001 for age; 54.8% male). Median follow-up was 8.6 (range, 0.2-37) years. Compared with WLE, MMS was used more frequently on the face (222 [80.2%] vs 141 [36.7%]) and scalp and neck (23 [8.3%] vs 26 [6.8%]; P < .001). The median (range) year of diagnosis was 2008 for the MMS group vs 2003MMS group vs (1978MMS group vs -2013 for the WLE group (P < .001). Overall recurrence rates were 5 (1.8%) in the MMS group and 22 (5.7%) in the WLE group (P = .07). Mean (SD) time to recurrence after MMS was 3.91 (4.4) years, and after WLE, 4.45 (2.7) years (P = .73). The 5-year recurrence rate was 1.1% in the MMS group and 4.1% in the WLE group (P = .07). For WLE-treated tumors, the surgical margin taken was greater for tumors that recurred compared with tumors that did not recur (P = .003). Five-year overall survival for MMS was 92% and for WLE was 94% (P = .28). Melanoma-specific mortality for the MMS group was 2 vs 13 patients for the WLE group, with mean (SD) survival of 6.5 (4.8) and 6.1 (0.8) years, respectively (P = .77).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE No significant differences were found in the recurrence rate, overall survival, or melanoma-specific survival of patients with MIS treated with MMS compared with WLE.

No abstract

In this case series, PSD occurred rarely and also showed generally mild course of disease in Turkey and most likely related to consanguineous of marriages. Future investigations on PSD will contribute to our progressing alternative targets for pathogenesis-based therapy.

Melanoma presents challenges for timely and accurate diagnosis. Expert panels have issued risk‐based screening guidelines, with recommended screening by visual inspection. To assess how recent technology can impact the risk/benefit considerations for melanoma screening, we comprehensively reviewed non‐invasive visual‐based technologies. Dermoscopy increases lesional diagnostic accuracy for both dermatologists and primary care providers; total body photography and sequential digital dermoscopic imaging also increase diagnostic accuracy, are supported by automated lesion detection and tracking, and may be best suited to use by dermatologists for longitudinal follow‐up. Specialized imaging modalities using non‐visible light technology have unproven benefit over dermoscopy and can be limited by cost, access, and training requirements. Mobile apps facilitate image capture and lesion tracking. Teledermatology has good concordance with face‐to‐face consultation and increases access, with increased accuracy using dermoscopy. Deep learning models can surpass dermatologist accuracy, but their clinical utility has yet to be demonstrated. Technology‐aided diagnosis may change the calculus of screening; however, well‐designed prospective trials are needed to assess the efficacy of these different technologies, alone and in combination to support refinement of guidelines for melanoma screening.

This study indicates that oral cyclosporine treatment may be a beneficial treatment option for severe AA. In addition to this, disease duration is an important prognostic factor that influences efficacy of oral cyclosporine treatment.