Dermoscopy Use Leads to Earlier Cutaneous Melanoma Diagnosis in Terms of Invasiveness and Size? A Single-Center, Retrospective Experience
by
, and
Gianluca Nazzaro
1,*
,
Emanuela Passoni
1, 
Fabio Pozzessere
2,
Carlo Alberto Maronese
1,2 and
Angelo Valerio Marzano
1,2
1
Dermatology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Via Pace, 9, 20122 Milan, Italy
2
Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20122 Milan, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(16), 4912; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164912
Submission received: 4 July 2022
/
Revised: 10 August 2022
/
Accepted: 19 August 2022
/
Published: 21 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Dermatology)
Abstract
:Background: The incidence of cutaneous melanoma has risen in recent years. The aim of this study was to compare cutaneous melanomas diagnosed at the Dermatology Unit of Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy, from 2006 to 2020 and between two specific biennia, i.e., 2006–2007 and 2019–2020. Methods: Retrospective chart review, with dermoscopic image collection, of cutaneous melanomas diagnosed at the Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy, from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 Results: A statistically significant increase was shown in the proportions of in situ melanoma and melanoma measuring less than 6 mm, i.e., small-diameter melanoma (SDM), across the studied period (p < 0.001). Moreover, in the biennium 2006–2007, among 220 melanoma diagnoses, 6 were in situ (2.7%), as compared with 68 melanomas in situ out of a total of 236 (28.8%) melanomas diagnosed in the biennium 2019–2020. A statistically significant difference in the proportion of in situ melanoma between the two biennia was demonstrated (p < 0.001). Furthermore, during the first biennium, 27/220 (12.3%) SDM were identified, as compared with 61/236 (25.9%) in the last. A statistically significant difference was shown in the proportion of SDM between the two (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The percentage of in situ melanomas and those that can be detected at a diameter <6 mm has increased. The latter has been shown to be around one-third of excised lesions, thus undermining the practicality of the ABCD mnemonic. Dermoscopic criteria for SDM are needed to help further refine melanoma diagnosis.
1. Introduction
The incidence of cutaneous melanoma has risen significantly in recent years. The reasons behind this trend are incompletely understood, although overdiagnosis is likely to have a role [1].
In parallel, dermoscopy has become more and more predominant in daily practice, with progressive improvements and equipment refinements [2,3,4,5] Indeed, after adequate training [6], dermoscopy has proved more accurate than clinical examination for the diagnosis of melanoma in the setting of pigmented skin lesions [7], improving the malignant/benign ratio in excised lesions [8]. It can be argued that the wider and wider adoption of dermoscopy, along with other possible factors at play (such as increased patient awareness and screening campaigns), could have had a measurable effect over the years on the characteristics of melanoma at the time of diagnosis, allowing its detection at an earlier stage. The aim of this research was to collect and compare cutaneous melanoma diagnoses rendered at the Dermatology Unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020. Further, we focused our comparison on two biennia, i.e., 2006–2007 and 2019–2020, respectively the first and the last in the range at our disposal.
2. Materials and Methods
The dermopathology archive of the Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy, was searched for histological diagnoses of malignant melanoma (MM) from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020.
The following variables were collected: age at the time of the diagnosis, gender, Breslow thickness, and maximum longitudinal diameter, as measured on dermoscopy.
Melanomas were classified into two categories, i.e., melanoma in situ (MIS) and invasive melanoma. Lesions were dichotomized also based on their dermoscopic diameter. Melanomas with a diameter < 6 mm were defined as small-diameter melanomas (SDM).
Diagnoses rendered in the period from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2007 (group A) and those made from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020 (group B) were chosen for comparison.
Results were expressed as counts and percentages or as medians and interquartile range (IQR).
Trend analysis across the studied period (2006–2020) was carried out using the general linear model for continuous variables (melanoma counts, median age at diagnosis) and the Mantel–Haenzsel test for trend for proportions (sex, MIS, SDM), respectively.
A Chi-square test was performed in order to assess the difference in the proportion of MIS and SDM between the two groups.
p-values below 0.05, two-sided, were considered statistically significant (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 27.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).
3. Results
Trends in melanoma diagnoses from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 at the Dermatology Unit of Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy, are illustrated in Figure 1. Demographics, counts of MIS, and invasive melanomas, as well as SDM and those >6 mm, are summarized in Table 1.
A statistically significant increase was noted in the total number of melanomas diagnosed between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2020. No trend for age (p = 0.41) or sex (p = 0.34) was documented across time.
A statistically significant increase was documented for the proportions of MIS (test for trend, p < 0.001) and SDM (test for trend, p < 0.001) in the same period. The annual mean percent change was +1.62% for MIS and +0.96% for SDM.
These trends retained statistical significance after adjusting for age and sex (p < 0.001).
Further, in the period from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2007 (group A), 220 melanomas were diagnosed, while, in the period from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020 (group B), 236 diagnoses of melanoma were collected.
There were 118 (53.6%) and 114 (48.3%) male patients in the first and second group, respectively.
Median age at the time of the diagnosis was 55 years (IQR: 41.75–69) in the first biennium and 63 years (IQR: 51–73) in the second one.
Six MIS were diagnosed during the first biennium (2006–2007) (2.7% of group A), while 68 MIS were recorded in the second one (2019–2020) (28.8% of group B). A statistically significant difference in the percentage of MIS diagnoses between the two groups was demonstrated (p < 0.001), meaning that melanomas excised in the 2019–2020 biennium were more likely to be in situ compared to melanomas excised in the 2006–2007 biennium.
Twenty-seven SDMs were diagnosed during the first biennium (12.3% of group A), whereas 61 SDMs were recorded during the second one (25.9% of group B). A statistically significant difference was shown in the percentage of SDMs between the two groups (p < 0.001), meaning that melanomas excised in the 2019–2020 biennium were more likely to be <6 mm diameter compared to lesions excised in the 2006–2007 biennium (Table 2).
Unsurprisingly, when assessing melanoma diagnoses rendered in 2020, the year of the COVID-19 pandemic, a decrease in the total number of melanomas diagnosed (−12.7%) was documented relative to 2019 (Figure 1). However, the proportion of cases diagnosed with invasive MM was approximately the same: 90/126 (71.4%) in 2019 vs. 81/110 (73.6%) in 2020.
4. Discussion
The findings of our single-center investigation show an incidence increase in MIS over the last fifteen years, this being in line with previous evidence from European and American studies [9,10,11,12,13]. Although we cannot confidently attribute this trend to dermoscopy exclusively and recognize the possibility that other factors may be at play (e.g., increased patient awareness), the addition of methodical dermoscopic evaluation represented the single, most evident change in routine clinical practice across the two biennia in our view.
Indeed, the entire dermatopathology unit and most of the dermatology unit remained the same over the years. It is also unlikely that behavioral changes in the population can account for such a dramatic change over just 15 years.
The reduction in the number of melanoma diagnoses in 2020 (as compared with 2019) was minor and likely related to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, reports concerning the impact of COVID-19 in the number of annual melanoma diagnoses have been inconsistent [14].
In the last decades, the incidence of cutaneous melanoma rose considerably in Caucasians, with percentage annual increases ranging from 3% to 7% [9]. The annual percentage increase in MIS incidence was greater than that of invasive MM, averaging a 14% incidence increase every year versus an average 4.5% incidence increase every year for invasive MM [10]. Indeed, such an increase in melanoma diagnoses seems to be mainly driven by MIS. Moreover, the slight incidence increase of invasive MM appears to be related mainly to thin neoplasms [11]. The incidence of thick invasive MM has also increased over time, although with a slower rate.
This scenario, known as the “melanoma epidemic”, has led to controversies over the years. Two main possible explanations have been proposed. The first one supports the idea that we are witnessing a true incidence increase for cutaneous melanoma, not just an increase in the diagnostic ability to detect it. This is believed to be due to population behavioral changes in lifestyle associated with an increased exposure to UV radiation during the past decades, starting from the 1950s [15] However, studies investigating the difference in melanoma incidence in patients respectively under and over the age of 50 years old showed stabilization or even a slight decrease among the former. One may argue that this is the result of primary prevention and even more recent lifestyle changes, such as: reduced sun exposure in younger individuals, appropriate sun protection use, less outdoor work, and reduced outdoor leisure activities [15]. As already mentioned in the introduction, the second possible explanation for the incidence increase of cutaneous melanoma is overdiagnosis. This could be due to greater patient awareness and healthcare seeking behavior for skin cancer screening [15], as well as the increased capability of dermatologists to diagnose lesions at an earlier stage, especially thanks to the ever more frequent use of dermoscopy [2,3] over the last decades. Indeed, dermoscopy allows the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma at an earlier stage, possibly determining the different incidence increases we are witnessing when comparing MIS and invasive MM. It is also possible that the adoption of ancillary techniques such as in vivo confocal microscopy (which, however, is not available at our institution) may have contributed to this trend, determining the excision of melanomas in a very early stage (i.e., earlier than what would have been done without it) [16].
Indeed, a decreasing trend in median tumor thickness over the years (2003–2017) was recently recorded in a registry-based study involving a significant proportion of the Italian population. This trend was paralleled by an increase in 5-year net survival rates, which, however, was only in part attributable to the former, according to the authors [17].
Dermoscopy has been demonstrated to be more accurate than naked eye examination for the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma when performed on suspicious skin lesions [18,19], while also allowing the accurate examination of smaller lesions. This, along with greater patient awareness both at an individual- and at the population-level, has likely led to an increase in the percentage of melanomas that are detected at a diameter < 6 mm (Figure 2), in our view. In the present study, the percentage of SDM has been shown to be around one third of excised lesions, thus undermining the practicality of the ABCD (asymmetry, border, color, diameter) mnemonic, which focuses heavily on lesions with a diameter > 6 mm [20]. Incidence trends and dermoscopic clues to detect SDMs have not been extensively investigated in the literature. Developing novel, accurate dermoscopic criteria for SDMs and/or adapting existing ones to this challenge could improve our ability to detect melanoma at an even earlier stage, countering the present risk of overdiagnosis.
Author Contributions
All authors have made substantial contribution to the work and have approved the final version of this article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article, as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Bell, K.J.L.; Nijsten, T. Melanoma overdiagnosis: Why it matters and what can be done about it. Br. J. Dermatol. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Butler, T.D.; Matin, R.N.; Affleck, A.G.; Fleming, C.J.; Bowling, J.C. Trends in dermoscopy use in the UK: Results from surveys in 2003 and 2012. Dermatol. Pract. Concept. 2015, 5, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lallas, A.; Apalla, Z.; Chaidemenos, G. New trends in dermoscopy to minimize the risk of missing melanoma. J. Ski. Cancer 2012, 2012, 820474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Argenyi, Z.B. Dermoscopy (epiluminescence microscopy) of pigmented skin lesions. Current status and evolving trends. Dermatol. Clin. 1997, 15, 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forsea, A.M.; Tschandl, P.; Zalaudek, I.; Del Marmol, V.; Soyer, H.P.; Argenziano, G.; Geller, A.C. Inequalities in the patterns of dermoscopy use and training across Europe: Conclusions of the Eurodermoscopy pan-European survey. Eur. J. Dermatol. 2020, 30, 524–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Argenziano, G.; Puig, S.; Zalaudek, I.; Sera, F.; Corona, R.; Alsina, M.; Barbato, F.; Carrera, C.; Ferrara, G.; Guilabert, A.; et al. Dermoscopy improves accuracy of primary care physicians to triage lesions suggestive of skin cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2006, 24, 1877–1882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bafounta, M.L.; Beauchet, A.; Aegerter, P.; Saiag, P. Is dermoscopy (epiluminescence microscopy) useful for the diagnosis of melanoma? Results of a meta-analysis using techniques adapted to the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Arch. Dermatol. 2001, 137, 1343–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Carli, P.; De Giorgi, V.; Crocetti, E.; Mannone, F.; Massi, D.; Chiarugi, A.; Giannotti, B. Improvement of malignant/ benign ratio in excised melanocytic lesions in the “dermoscopy era”: A retrospective study 1997–2001. Br. J. Dermatol. 2004, 150, 687–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vilar-Coromina, N.; Vilar-Coromina, N.; Vilardell, L.; Cano, A.; Marcos-Gragera, R.; Marcos-Gragera, R. Rapid increase in incidence of melanoma in situ in Girona (Spain), 1994–2005. Effectiveness of public education campaigns about early diagnosis. Actas Dermo-Sifiliogr. 2010, 101, 561–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helvind, N.M.; Hölmich, L.R.; Smith, S.; Glud, M.; Andersen, K.K.; Dalton, S.O.; Drzewiecki, K.T. Incidence of In Situ and Invasive Melanoma in Denmark from 1985 Through 2012: A National Database Study of 24,059 Melanoma Cases. JAMA Dermatol. 2015, 151, 1087–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chuang, T.Y.; Charles, J.; Reizner, G.T.; Elpern, D.J.; Farmer, E.R. Melanoma in Kauai, Hawaii, 1981–1990: The significance of in situ melanoma and the incidence trend. Int. J. Dermatol. 1999, 38, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sacchetto, L.; Zanetti, R.; Comber, H.; Bouchardy, C.; Brewster, D.H.; Broganelli, P.; Chirlaque, M.D.; Coza, D.; Galceran, J.; Gavin, A.; et al. Trends in incidence of thick, thin and in situ melanoma in Europe. Eur. J. Cancer 2018, 92, 108–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Toender, A.; Kjær, S.K.; Jensen, A. Increased incidence of melanoma in situ in Denmark from 1997 to 2011: Results from a nationwide population-based study. Melanoma Res. 2014, 24, 488–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ricci, F.; Abeni, D. Heterogeneity of reports about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on melanoma diagnosis. Br. J. Dermatol. 2022, 187, 135–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Eriksson, H.; Nielsen, K.; Vassilaki, I.; Lapins, J.; Mikiver, R.; Lyth, J.; Isaksson, K. Trend Shifts in Age-Specific Incidence for In Situ and Invasive Cutaneous Melanoma in Sweden. Cancers 2021, 13, 2838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guida, S.; Longo, C.; Casari, A.; Ciardo, S.; Manfredini, M.; Reggiani, C.; Pellacani, G.; Farnetani, F. Update on the use of confocal microscopy in melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer. G. Ital. Dermatol. Venereol. 2015, 150, 547–563. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Zamagni, F.; Bucchi, L.; Mancini, S.; Crocetti, E.; Maso, L.D.; Ferretti, S.; Biggeri, A.; Villani, S.; Baldacchini, F.; Giuliani, O.; et al. The relative contribution of the decreasing trend in tumour thickness to the 2010s increase in net survival from cutaneous malignant melanoma in Italy: A population-based investigation. Br. J. Dermatol. 2022, 187, 52–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dinnes, J.; Deeks, J.J.; Chuchu, N.; di Ruffano, L.F.; Matin, R.N.; Thomson, D.R.; Wong, K.Y.; Aldridge, R.B.; Abbott, R.; Fawzy, M.; et al. Dermoscopy, with and without visual inspection, for diagnosing melanoma in adults. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2018, 12, CD011902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vestergaard, M.E.; Macaskill, P.; Holt, P.E.; Menzies, S. Dermoscopy compared with naked eye examination for the diagnosis of primary melanoma: A meta-analysis of studies performed in a clinical setting. Br. J. Dermatol. 2008, 159, 669–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maley, A.; Rhodes, A.R. Cutaneous melanoma: Preoperative tumor diameter in a general dermatology outpatient setting. Dermatol. Surg. 2014, 40, 446–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1.
Trends in melanoma diagnoses from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 at the Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. The gray column in 2020 symbolizes the beginning of the era of COVID-19.
Figure 1.
Trends in melanoma diagnoses from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 at the Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. The gray column in 2020 symbolizes the beginning of the era of COVID-19.
Figure 2.
Dermoscopy of four representative small-diameter melanomas, including invasive pT1a (a,c,d) and in situ melanomas (b). Dermoscopic features of depicted lesions include an atypical pigment network (a,b), subtle irregular globules (b), a blue–white veil (a,c,d), and a starburst pattern (c,d).
Figure 2.
Dermoscopy of four representative small-diameter melanomas, including invasive pT1a (a,c,d) and in situ melanomas (b). Dermoscopic features of depicted lesions include an atypical pigment network (a,b), subtle irregular globules (b), a blue–white veil (a,c,d), and a starburst pattern (c,d).
Table 1.
Characteristics of cutaneous melanomas excised from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 at the Dermatology Unit of Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Table 1.
Characteristics of cutaneous melanomas excised from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 at the Dermatology Unit of Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
| Males | Median Age, Years (IQR) | MIS | Invasive MM | SDM (<0.6 mm) | MM ≥ 0.6 mm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 44 (40.74%) | 54 (42–68.75) | 4/108 (3.7%) | 104/108 | 13/108 (12.04%) | 95/108 |
| 2007 | 74 (66.07%) | 55.5 (41–69) | 2/112 (1.79%) | 110/112 | 14/112 (12.50%) | 98/112 |
| 2008 | 61 (55.96%) | 55 (40.5–68) | 5/109 (4.59%) | 104/109 | 12/109 (11.01%) | 97/109 |
| 2009 | 66 (57.89%) | 54 (41–67.5) | 7/114 (6.14%) | 107/114 | 17/114 (14.91%) | 97/114 |
| 2010 | 49 (44.14%) | 60 (46.5–72) | 6/111 (5.41%) | 105/111 | 16/111 (14.41%) | 95/111 |
| 2011 | 53 (46.90%) | 53 (41.5–69) | 12/113 (10.62%) | 101/113 | 20/113 (17.70%) | 93/113 |
| 2012 | 55 (47.41%) | 56.5 (42–73.5) | 11/116 (9.48%) | 105/116 | 18/116 (15.52%) | 98/116 |
| 2013 | 49 (44.55%) | 61 (53.5–72.5) | 14/110 (12.73%) | 96/110 | 22/110 (20.00%) | 88/110 |
| 2014 | 61 (53.04%) | 59 (44–69.5) | 19/115 (16.52%) | 96/115 | 23/115 (20.00%) | 92/115 |
| 2015 | 57 (47.90%) | 58 (49–68.5) | 25/119 (21.01%) | 94/119 | 19/119 (15.97%) | 100/119 |
| 2016 | 72 (57.60%) | 62 (53.5–71) | 28/125 (22.40%) | 97/125 | 26/125 (20.80%) | 99/125 |
| 2017 | 64 (52.46%) | 56 (46.5–67) | 31/122 (25.41%) | 91/122 | 29/122 (23.77%) | 93/122 |
| 2018 | 59 (46.09%) | 59 (42–74.5) | 29/128 (22.66%) | 99/128 | 29/128 (22.66%) | 99/128 |
| 2019 | 56 (44.44%) | 63 (52–73) | 36/126 (28.57%) | 90/126 | 33/126 (26.19%) | 93/126 |
| 2020 | 58 (52.73%) | 63 (50–72) | 29/110 (26.36%) | 81/110 | 28/110 (25.45%) | 82/110 |
MIS: Melanoma in situ; MM: malignant melanoma; SDM: small-diameter melanoma.
Table 2.
Characteristics of cutaneous melanomas excised in the period 2006–2007 and 2019–2020 at the Dermatology Unit of Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Table 2.
Characteristics of cutaneous melanomas excised in the period 2006–2007 and 2019–2020 at the Dermatology Unit of Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
| Males | Median Age, Years (IQR) | MIS | Invasive MM | SDM (<0.6 mm) | MM ≥ 0.6 mm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006–2007 (Group A) | 118 (53.6%) | 55 (41.75–69) | 6/220 (2.7%) | 214/220 | 27/220 (12.3%) | 193/220 |
| 2019–2020 (Group B) | 114 (48.3%) | 63 (51–73) | 68/236 (28.8%) | 168/236 | 61/236 (25.9%) | 175/236 |
MIS: Melanoma in situ; MM: malignant melanoma; SDM: small-diameter melanoma.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Nazzaro, G.; Passoni, E.; Pozzessere, F.; Maronese, C.A.; Marzano, A.V. Dermoscopy Use Leads to Earlier Cutaneous Melanoma Diagnosis in Terms of Invasiveness and Size? A Single-Center, Retrospective Experience. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 4912. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164912
AMA Style
Nazzaro G, Passoni E, Pozzessere F, Maronese CA, Marzano AV. Dermoscopy Use Leads to Earlier Cutaneous Melanoma Diagnosis in Terms of Invasiveness and Size? A Single-Center, Retrospective Experience. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022; 11(16):4912. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164912
Chicago/Turabian StyleNazzaro, Gianluca, Emanuela Passoni, Fabio Pozzessere, Carlo Alberto Maronese, and Angelo Valerio Marzano. 2022. "Dermoscopy Use Leads to Earlier Cutaneous Melanoma Diagnosis in Terms of Invasiveness and Size? A Single-Center, Retrospective Experience" Journal of Clinical Medicine 11, no. 16: 4912. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164912
APA StyleNazzaro, G., Passoni, E., Pozzessere, F., Maronese, C. A., & Marzano, A. V. (2022). Dermoscopy Use Leads to Earlier Cutaneous Melanoma Diagnosis in Terms of Invasiveness and Size? A Single-Center, Retrospective Experience. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11(16), 4912. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164912
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
