Screening for Skin Cancer

Abstract

ImportanceSkin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the US. There are different types of skin cancer varying in disease incidence and severity. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common types of skin cancer but infrequently lead to death or substantial morbidity. Melanomas represent about 1% of skin cancer and cause the most skin cancer deaths. Melanoma is about 30 times more common in White persons than in Black persons. However, persons with darker skin color are often diagnosed at later stages, when skin cancer is more difficult to treat.ObjectiveTo update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults.PopulationAsymptomatic adolescents and adults who do not have a history of premalignant or malignant skin lesions.Evidence AssessmentThe USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults.RecommendationThe USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in adolescents and adults. (I statement)

Lived Experiences and Fear of Cancer Recurrence Among Survivors of Localized Cutaneous Melanoma

“…Recently the US Preventive Services Task Force concluded that there was insufficient evidence for or against screening for melanoma, citing in their evidence review sparse information on harms. 19,20 Our findings highlight some of the potential psychological harms of diagnosing melanoma, which should be considered when assessing the net benefit of screening, particularly given that many or most screening-detected early-stage melanomas will not progress. 21,22…”

Molecular and Histopathological Characterization of Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinomas: A Case–Control Study

“…However, due to intrinsic limitations of the study design (such as the small number of enrolled subjects, and the failure to match adequately in terms of tumor thickness and/or differentiation), we would advise not to ignore such parameters and related risk factors when dealing with patients affected by cSCCs in clinical practice. Due to the retrospective nature of patient enrollment, clinical data on immune suppression were not fully available for our cohort, with a subsequent lack of information on such a renowned risk factor [ 31 , 32 ]. Moreover, a possible bias in the interpretation of our data resides in the lack of information regarding PD-L1/PD-1 expression in the two study groups, which could potentially bring new insights in terms of clinical and therapeutic implications [ 33 ].…”

Efficacy and Safety of Rechallenge with BRAF/MEK Inhibitors in Advanced Melanoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Worldwide, the mortality rate is disproportionally higher in transitioning countries, likely due to difficulties in accessing the newest medications [2,5]. The insufficient evidence for screening as a secondary prevention for the early detection of melanoma patients contributes to the disease Cancers 2023, 15, 3754 2 of 16 burden [6,7]. In addition, some patients experience disease progression or are diagnosed with advanced disease, leading to poorer outcomes [8,9].…”