Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Values of Presurgical Clinical Diagnosis of Excised Benign and Malignant Skin Tumors: A Prospective Study of 835 Lesions in 778 Patients

&NA; This article reports on the sensitivity and positive predictive value of clinical diagnosis of benign and malignant skin tumors by expert plastic surgeons in an Israeli clinic. Most published reports have focused on the sensitivity of clinicians’ diagnoses, a general measure of the physician's skill that does not predict the rate of accuracy of a physician's diagnoses. Our study of 835 lesions in 778 patients, one of the largest Israeli series, assesses the clinical diagnosis of malignant and benign skin tumors and is one of the few that provide information on the positive predictive value, the measure that is of interest to both physicians and patients. The majority of tumors were benign (56.8 percent), 31.6 percent were malignant, and 11.6 percent were premalignant. Among the 474 benign lesions, 46 percent were nevi. The most common nevi subclass was compound nevi (53 percent), 9 percent of the nevi were dysplastic, and 5 percent were blue nevi. The most common malignant tumor was basal cell carcinoma, accounting for 78 percent of malignant tumors. Although sensitivity for clinical diagnosis of malignancy was 91.3 percent, the positive predictive value for clinical diagnosis of malignancy was 71.3 percent. The sensitivity rate for clinically diagnosing premalignant tumors was 42.3 percent, whereas the positive predictive value for these diagnoses was higher (64.1 percent). The sensitivity rate for diagnosis of all benign lesions was 85.9 percent, and the positive predictive value was 94.2 percent. The sensitivity rate for diagnosis of all nevi was 87.6 percent, and the positive predictive value was 85.7 percent: i.e., only seven of the 218 pathologically proven diagnoses of nevi (3.2 percent) were falsely diagnosed as malignant lesions. Even more interestingly, five of the 223 clinical diagnoses of nevi (2.2 percent) were pathologically proven to be malignant melanomas, and seven were found to be premalignant lesions (3.1 percent). It was concluded that publications which report only on the sensitivity neglect to provide information of interest regarding the positive predictive value. Often, positive predictive value is qualitatively different from the sensitivity, and thus relying only on the sensitivity may lead to incorrect evaluation of a clinical judgment, which may result in erroneous surgical decisions. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 108: 1982, 2001.)

[1]  J. Whited,et al.  Primary care clinicians' performance for detecting actinic keratoses and skin cancer. , 1997, Archives of internal medicine.

[2]  M. Berwick,et al.  Complete follow-up and evaluation of a skin cancer screening in Connecticut. , 1990, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[3]  C. la Vecchia,et al.  Site distribution of different types of skin cancer: New aetiological clues , 1996, International journal of cancer.

[4]  L. Schouten,et al.  Volunteer Melanoma Screenings: Follow‐Up, Compliance, and Outcome , 1997, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[5]  R. Marks Freckles, moles, melanoma and the ozone layer: a tale of the relationship between humans and their environment , 1989, The Medical journal of Australia.

[6]  C. Cockerell,et al.  Sensitivity of diagnosis of malignant melanoma: A clinicopathologic study with a critical assessment of biopsy techniques , 1992, Experimental dermatology.

[7]  M. Mihm,et al.  Cutaneous melanoma: pathology, relevant prognostic indicators and progression. , 1995, British medical bulletin.

[8]  H C van Houwelingen,et al.  The (in)validity of sensitivity and specificity. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  D. Rigel,et al.  Evaluation of the American Academy of Dermatology's National Skin Cancer Early Detection and Screening Program. , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[10]  D. Brodland,et al.  The Epidemiology of Skin Cancer , 1996, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[11]  Josef Smolle,et al.  Diagnostic reliability of dermoscopic criteria for detecting malignant melanoma. , 1995 .

[12]  H Kerl,et al.  Sensitivity in the clinical diagnosis of malignant melanoma , 1994, Melanoma research.

[13]  D. Weedon,et al.  Diagnosis of skin cancer in the general population: clinical accuracy in the Nambour survey , 1988, The Medical journal of Australia.

[14]  M. G. Cook,et al.  Accuracy in clinically evaluating pigmented lesions. , 1989, BMJ.

[15]  Geoffrey G. Hallock,et al.  Prospective Study of the Accuracy of the Surgeon's Diagnosis in 2000 Excised Skin Tumors. , 1998 .

[16]  R N Hoover,et al.  The emerging epidemic of melanoma and squamous cell skin cancer. , 1989, JAMA.

[17]  R. Gallagher,et al.  Follow-up and evaluation of skin cancer screening in British Columbia. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[18]  S. Rosso,et al.  The multicentre south European study 'Helios'. I: Skin characteristics and sunburns in basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas of the skin. , 1996, British Journal of Cancer.

[19]  Mackie,et al.  Clinical accuracy of the diagnosis of cutaneous malignant melanoma , 1998, The British journal of dermatology.

[20]  L J Schouten,et al.  False-negative findings in skin cancer and melanoma screening. , 1995, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[21]  Irene Gage,et al.  Evaluation of melanoma/skin cancer screening in Massachusetts. Preliminary results , 1990, Cancer.