Skin cancers are the most frequent cancers in fair-skinned populations, but we can prevent them.

Cancers of the skin are the most commonly occurring cancers in humans. In fair-skinned populations, up to 95% of keratinocyte skin cancers and 70-95% of cutaneous melanomas are caused by ultraviolet radiation and are thus theoretically preventable. Currently, however, there is no comprehensive global advice on practical steps to be taken to reduce the toll of skin cancer. To address this gap, an expert working group comprising clinicians and researchers from Africa, America, Asia, Australia, and Europe, together with learned societies (European Association of Dermato-Oncology, Euromelanoma, Euroskin, European Union of Medical Specialists, and the Melanoma World Society) reviewed the extant evidence and issued the following evidence-based recommendations for photoprotection as a strategy to prevent skin cancer. Fair skinned people, especially children, should minimise their exposure to ultraviolet radiation, and are advised to use protective measures when the UV index is forecast to reach 3 or higher. Protective measures include a combination of seeking shade, physical protection (e.g. clothing, hat, sunglasses), and applying broad-spectrum, SPF 30 + sunscreens to uncovered skin. Intentional exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation for the purpose of sunbathing and tanning is considered an unhealthy behaviour and should be avoided. Similarly, use of solaria and other artificial sources of ultraviolet radiation to encourage tanning should be strongly discouraged, through regulation if necessary. Primary prevention of skin cancer has a positive return on investment. We encourage policymakers to communicate these messages to the general public and promote their wider implementation.

Melanoma epidemiology in Europe: what is new?

Every year in Europe over 150,000 new cases of melanoma are reported and over 25,000 lives are lost to this tumor. Incidence has been rising rapidly, faster than for any other cancer, and it is expected to continue to do so in most regions. Mortality also crept up, decades-long, with only few very recent exceptions. Thus, melanoma remains a public health problem that will not go away soon, nor easy. Some notable progress has been made in the last decade in the fight against this tumor. Registration and reporting for skin cancers improved across Europe. Incidence trends have begun to plateau or even to descend in younger age groups, in some countries, and there are encouraging signs that mortality might do the same, after the recent therapeutic breakthroughs. Survival rates are on average above 80% at 5 years for European patients, while diagnosis trends toward ever thinner tumors. Yet this progress is far from uniform across the continent, with many Southern-and Eastern European countries still struggling with sub-optimal cancer reporting, delayed access to innovative treatments, late detection and insufficient healthcare funding, that push survival rates down to harrowing 50%. This article aims to give an updated overview of the epidemiological situation of melanoma in Europe, highlighting the progress but also the persisting disparities in tumor burden, prognosis and access to quality cancer care and surveillance between European countries, as a reminder that relentless efforts must continue in order to tackle this aggressive tumor in an effective and equitable manner.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of actinic keratoses, epithelial UV-induced dysplasia and field cancerization on behalf of European Association of Dermato-Oncology, European Dermatology Forum, European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and Union of Medical Specialists (Union Européenne des Médecins Spécialistes).

A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology, the European Dermatology Forum, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, and the European Union of Medical Specialists was formed to develop European recommendations on AK diagnosis and treatment, based on current literature and expert consensus. This guideline addresses the epidemiology, diagnostics, risk stratification and treatments in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients. Actinic keratoses (AK) are potential precursors of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and display typical histopathologic and immunohistochemical features of this malignancy in an early stage. They can develop into cSSC in situ and become invasive in a low percentage of cases. AK is the most frequent neoplasia in white populations, frequently occurring within a cancerous field induced by ultraviolet radiation. Since it cannot be predicted, which lesion will progress to cSCC and when treatment is usually recommended. The diagnosis of AK and field cancerization is made by clinical examination. Dermatoscopy, confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography or line-field confocal-OCT can help in the differential diagnosis of AK and other skin neoplasms. A biopsy is indicated in clinically and/or dermatoscopically suspicious and/or treatment-refractory lesions. The choice of treatment depends on patients' and lesion characteristics. For single non-hyperkeratotic lesions, the treatment can be started upon patient's request with destructive treatments or topical treatments. For multiple lesions, field cancerization treatment is advised with topical treatments and photodynamic therapy. Preventive measures such as sun protection, self-examination and repeated field cancerization treatments of previously affected skin areas in high-risk patients are advised.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Part 1: Diagnostics and prevention-Update 2023.

Invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers in white populations, accounting for 20% of all cutaneous malignancies. Overall, cSCC mostly has very good prognosis after treatment, with 5-year cure rates greater than 90%. Despite the overall favourable prognosis and the proportionally rare deaths, cSCC is associated with a high total number of deaths due to its high incidence. A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was formed to update recommendations on cSCC, based on current literature and expert consensus. Part 1 of the guidelines addresses the updates on classification, epidemiology, diagnosis, risk stratification, staging and prevention in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: Part 2. Treatment-Update 2023.

In order to update recommendations on treatment, supportive care, education, and follow-up of patients with invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), a multidisciplinary panel of experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV), and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed. Recommendations were based on an evidence-based literature review, guidelines, and expert consensus. Treatment recommendations are presented for common primary cSCC (low risk, high risk), locally advanced cSCC, regional metastatic cSCC (operable or inoperable), and distant metastatic cSCC. For common primary cSCC, the first-line treatment is surgical excision with postoperative margin assessment or micrographically controlled surgery. Achieving clear surgical margins is the most important treatment consideration for patients with cSCCs amenable to surgery. Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with high-risk localised cSCC with clear surgical margins, current evidence has not shown significant benefit for those with at least one high-risk factor. Radiotherapy should be considered as the primary treatment for non-surgical candidates/tumours. For cSCC with cytologically or histologically confirmed regional nodal metastasis, lymph node dissection is recommended. For patients with metastatic or locally advanced cSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiotherapy, anti-PD-1 agents are the first-line systemic treatment, with cemiplimab being the first approved systemic agent for advanced cSCC by the Food and Drugs Administration/European Medicines Agency. Second-line systemic treatments for advanced cSCC, include epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (cetuximab) combined with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Multidisciplinary board decisions are mandatory for all patients with advanced cSCC, considering the risks of toxicity, the age and frailty of patients, and co-morbidities, including immunosuppression. Patients should be engaged in informed, shared decision-making on management and be provided with the best supportive care to improve symptom management and quality of life. The frequency of follow-up visits and investigations for subsequent new cSCC depends on underlying risk characteristics.

Delphi Consensus Among International Experts on the Diagnosis, Management, and Surveillance for Lentigo Maligna.

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma of the lentigo maligna (LM) type is challenging. There is lack of consensus on the optimal diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. OBJECTIVES: To obtain general consensus on the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for LM. METHODS: A modified Delphi method was used. The invited participants were either members of the International Dermoscopy Society, academic experts, or authors of published articles relating to skin cancer and melanoma. Participants were required to respond across three rounds using a 4-point Likert scale). Consensus was defined as >75% of participants agreeing/strongly agreeing or disagreeing/strongly disagreeing. RESULTS: Of the 31 experts invited to participate in this Delphi study, 29 participants completed Round 1 (89.9% response rate), 25/31 completed Round 2 (77.5% response rate), and 25/31 completed Round 3 (77.5% response rate). Experts agreed that LM diagnosis should be based on a clinical and dermatoscopic approach (92%) followed by a biopsy. The most appropriate primary treatment of LM was deemed to be margin-controlled surgery (83.3%), although non-surgical modalities, especially imiquimod, were commonly used either as alternative off-label primary treatment in selected patients or as adjuvant therapy following surgery; 62% participants responded life-long clinical follow-up was needed for LM. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and histological diagnosis of LM is challenging and should be based on macroscopic, dermatoscopic, and RCM examination followed by a biopsy. Different treatment modalities and follow-up should be carefully discussed with the patient.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2022.

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on the systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with one to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumor thickness ≥1.0 mm or ≥0.8 mm with additional histological risk factors, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Therapeutic decisions in stage III/IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("tumor board"). Adjuvant therapies can be proposed in stage III/completely resected stage IV patients and are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or alternatively dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF mutant patients. In distant metastases (stage IV), either resected or not, systemic treatment is always indicated. For first-line treatment particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies shall be considered. In stage IV melanoma with a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harboring a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered as second-line therapy. Systemic therapy in stage III/IV melanoma is a rapidly changing landscape, and it is likely that these recommendations may change in the near future.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 1: Diagnostics: Update 2022.

Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is potentially the most dangerous form of skin tumor and causes 90% of skin cancer mortality. A unique collaboration of multi-disciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on CM diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. The diagnosis of melanoma can be made clinically and shall always be confirmed with dermatoscopy. If a melanoma is suspected, a histopathological examination is always required. Sequential digital dermatoscopy and full body photography can be used in high-risk patients to improve the detection of early melanoma. Where available, confocal reflectance microscopy can also improve clinical diagnosis in special cases. Melanoma shall be classified according to the 8th version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer classification. Thin melanomas up to 0.8 mm tumor thickness do not require further imaging diagnostics. From stage IB onwards, examinations with lymph node sonography are recommended, but no further imaging examinations. From stage IIC onwards whole-body examinations with computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography CT (PET-CT) in combination with brain magnetic resonance imaging are recommended. From stage III and higher, mutation testing is recommended, particularly for BRAF V600 mutation. It is important to provide a structured follow-up to detect relapses and secondary primary melanomas as early as possible. There is no evidence to define the frequency and extent of examinations. A stage-based follow-up scheme is proposed which, according to the experience of the guideline group, covers the optimal requirements, but further studies may be considered. This guideline is valid until the end of 2024.

The daily use of dermoscopy in the Netherlands

Background: Dermoscopy is a well-established tool for the diagnosis of skin diseases and skin cancer. Data on the use of dermoscopy by Dutch dermatologists is lacking. Objectives: To identify factors influencing the use of dermoscopy in daily dermatology practice and compare the results with those from other European countries. Materials & Methods: As a part of a pan-European study, all registered dermatologists in the Netherlands were asked to complete an online survey regarding questions about training and attitude towards dermoscopy. Results: Valid answers were collected from 213 respondents (out of 475 registered dermatologists), of whom 99% reported using dermoscopy. Of those, 41% reported dermoscopy training during residency. A high level of dermoscopy use for different types of skin diseases was reported by 28.9%. Users considered dermoscopy useful for pigmented lesions, especially for the early diagnosis of melanoma, but less advantageous for inflammatory diagnoses. Seventy-three percent reported that dermoscopy increased the number of melanomas detected compared to naked eye diagnosis, and two-thirds reported a decrease in unnecessary biopsies of benign lesions. Almost one third reported that on at least one occasion, a lesion that appeared benign on dermoscopy proved to be a melanoma after excision. Conclusion: This study reveals that nearly all Dutch dermatologists use dermoscopy, particularly for melanocytic lesions, but less so for inflammatory diagnoses. Most believe that they detected more melanomas as a result of using dermoscopy compared to the naked eye. A high level of dermoscopy use was significantly associated with seeing more skin cancer patients each month compared to infrequent use.

Inequalities in the patterns of dermoscopy use and training across Europe: conclusions of the Eurodermoscopy pan-European survey.

BACKGROUND: Dermoscopy is a widely used technique, recommended in clinical practice guidelines worldwide for the early diagnosis of skin cancers. Intra-European disparities are reported for early detection and prognosis of skin cancers, however, no information exists about regional variation in patterns of dermoscopy use across Europe. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the regional differences in patterns of dermoscopy use and training among European dermatologists. MATERIALS & METHODS: An online survey of European-registered dermatologists regarding dermoscopy training, practice and attitudes was established. Answers from Eastern (EE) versus Western European (WE) countries were compared and their correlation with their respective countries' gross domestic product/capita (GDPc) and total and government health expenditure/capita (THEc and GHEc) was analysed. RESULTS: We received 4,049 responses from 14 WE countries and 3,431 from 18 EE countries. A higher proportion of WE respondents reported dermoscopy use (98% vs. 77%, p<0.001) and training during residency (43% vs. 32%) or anytime (96.5% vs. 87.6%) (p<0.001) compared to EE respondents. The main obstacles in dermoscopy use were poor access to dermoscopy equipment in EE and a lack of confidence in one's skills in WE. GDPc, THEc and GHEc correlated with rate of dermoscopy use and dermoscopy training during residency (Spearman rho: 0.5-0.7, p<0.05), and inversely with availability of dermoscopy equipment. CONCLUSION: The rates and patterns of dermoscopy use vary significantly between Western and Eastern Europe, on a background of economic inequality. Regionally adapted interventions to increase access to dermoscopy equipment and training might enhance the use of this technique towards improving the early detection of skin cancers.

Melanoma Epidemiology and Early Detection in Europe: Diversity and Disparities.

Melanoma claims annually more than 20,000 lives in Europe and is an important public health burden through its continuously increasing incidence and with its high mortality, costs, and complexity of care in advanced stages. Epidemiological surveillance is indispensable for the research into its causes, new prognostic markers, and innovative therapies, as well as for the building of efficient cancer control plans. However, important differences in the sources and availability of accurate epidemiological data exist among European countries and regions, contributing to a heterogeneous picture with 20-fold differences in the reported national melanoma incidence rates, divergent mortality trends, and solid disparities in survival across the Continent. Countries in the eastern half of Europe report the lowest incidence rates, but high case fatality, persisting and increasing mortality, a higher proportion of thicker tumors and late diagnosis, and lower survival rates. They are the least well equipped with quality cancer registration and reporting, and they lag behind in efficient cancer control plans implementation. This review highlights the main differences in melanoma epidemiology across Europe, together with an insight into their underlying causes in the areas of melanoma registration, early diagnosis, and prevention. These differences should be acknowledged and understood by physicians, researchers, and all stakeholders involved in improving melanoma care and outcomes, as no one-size-fits-all solution can tackle the melanoma problem in Europe. Instead, there is a need for nuanced strategies, adapted to the heterogeneous national and regional contexts, that would build on European diversity to eliminate the outcome disparities.

European interdisciplinary guideline on invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the skin: Part 1. epidemiology, diagnostics and prevention.

Invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers in the white populations, accounting for 20% of all cutaneous malignancies. Factors implicated in cSCC etiopathogenesis include ultraviolet radiation exposure and chronic photoaging, age, male sex, immunosuppression, smoking and genetic factors. A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO) and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to update recommendations on cSCC classification, diagnosis, risk stratification, staging and prevention, based on current literature, staging systems and expert consensus. Common cSCCs are typically indolent tumors, and most have a good prognosis with 5-year cure rates of greater than 90%, and a low rate of metastases (<4%). Further risk stratification into low-risk or high-risk common primary cSCC is recommended based on proposed high-risk factors. Advanced cSCC is classified as locally advanced (lacSCC), and metastatic (mcSCC) including locoregional metastatic or distant metastatic cSCC. Current systems used for staging include the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition, the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) 8th edition, and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) system. Physical examination for all cSCCs should include total body skin examination and clinical palpation of lymph nodes, especially of the draining basins. Radiologic imaging such as ultrasound of the regional lymph nodes, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scans are recommended for staging of high-risk cSCC. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is currently not recommended. Nicotinamide, oral retinoids, and topical 5-FU have been used for the chemoprevention of subsequent cSCCs in high-risk patients but are not routinely recommended. Education about sun protection measures including reducing sun exposure, use of protective clothing, regular use of sunscreens and avoidance of artificial tanning, is recommended.

Diagnosis and treatment of Kaposi's sarcoma: European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline (EDF/EADO/EORTC).

Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) is a multifocal neoplasm of lymphatic endothelium-derived cells infected with human herpesvirus 8. Four clinical subtypes are distinguished: the classic, the endemic, the epidemic subtype in HIV positive patients and the iatrogenic subtype. The diagnosis is primarily based on clinical features and confirmation by histology with immunohistochemistry. Cutaneous distribution and severity, mucosal, nodal and visceral involvement depend on the type of KS with in general indolent behaviour and chronic evolution in the classic subtype and the more severe forms in iatrogenic or epidemic subtypes. Management should aim at achieving disease control. For localised lesions, several local therapies have been developed without randomised trial comparisons. Radiotherapy, intralesional chemotherapies and electrochemotherapy have high response rates. Topical treatments-imiquimod or topical 9-cis-retinoid acid-can also be used. Systemic treatments are reserved for locally aggressive extensive and disseminated KS: the recommended first-line agents are pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and paclitaxel. In CKS, PLD or low-dose interferon-alfa are the recommended first-line agents in younger patients. In AIDS-related KS, combination antiretroviral therapy is the first treatment option; specific systemic treatment is needed only in case of extensive disease and in the prevention and treatment of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. In post-transplant KS, tapering down immunosuppressive therapy and switching to mammalian target of rapamycin (m-TOR) inhibitors are used. Follow-up schedules for patients with KS disease depend on aggressiveness of the disease.

Distinct Clinicopathological and Prognostic Features of Thin Nodular Primary Melanomas: An International Study from 17 Centers.

BACKGROUND: Nodular melanoma (NM) is more likely to be fatal compared with other melanoma subtypes, an effect attributed to its greater Breslow thickness. METHODS: Clinicopathological features of NM and superficial spreading melanoma (SSM) diagnosed in 17 centers in Europe (n = 15), the United States, and Australia between 2006 and 2015, were analyzed by multivariable logistic regression analysis, with emphasis on thin (T1 ≤ 1.0 mm) melanomas. Cox analysis assessed melanoma-specific survival. All statistical tests were two sided. RESULTS: In all, 20 132 melanomas (NM: 5062, SSM: 15 070) were included. Compared with T1 SSM, T1 NM was less likely to have regression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.29 to 0.72) or nevus remnants histologically (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.42 to 0.85), and more likely to have mitoses (OR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.33 to 2.93) and regional metastasis (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.02 to 3.05). T1 NM had a higher mitotic rate than T1 SSM (adjusted geometric mean = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.9 to 2.5 vs 1.6, 95% CI = 1.5 to 1.7 per mm2, P < .001). Cox multivariable analysis showed a higher risk for melanoma-specific death for NM compared with SSM for T1 (HR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.24 to 3.56) and T2 melanomas (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.68), and after accounting for center heterogeneity, the difference was statistically significant only for T1 (HR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.28 to 3.78). The NM subtype did not confer increased risk within each stratum (among localized tumors or cases with regional metastasis). CONCLUSIONS: T1 NM (compared with T1 SSM) was associated with a constellation of aggressive characteristics that may confer a worse prognosis. Our results indicate NM is a high-risk melanoma subtype that should be considered for inclusion in future prognostic classifications of melanoma.

Role of modern imaging techniques for the in vivo diagnosis of lichen planus.

Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that can sometimes affect mucosal surfaces, with unknown pathogenesis, even though it appears to be an autoimmune disease. The diagnosis of lichen planus is usually based on histopathological examination of the lesions. Nowadays, the classical invasive diagnostic methods are replaced by modern non-invasive techniques. In this review, we present the main non-invasive imaging methods (dermoscopy, reflectance confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography, ultrasound and diffuse reflection spectrophotometry) used in the diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring of lichen planus. Dermoscopy is a non-invasive method initially used for diagnosis of pigmented tumors but now is used also for inflammatory and infectious skin diseases. In lichen planus, the dermoscopy increases the accuracy of diagnosis, avoids skin biopsies commonly used and can be useful in the therapeutic monitoring by repeated investigation at different stages of treatment. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a novel non-invasive imaging technique that is prevalently used for the diagnosis of skin tumors and inflammatory skin diseases. This technology has been mostly employed for bedside, real-time microscopic evaluation of psoriasis, lichen planus, contact dermatitis, revealing specific confocal features to support clinical diagnosis and assist with patient management. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an emergent imaging technique, developed over the last decade, based on the interaction of the infrared radiation (900-1,500 nm) and the living tissues. A limited information exists on the benefits of OCT technology for the in vivo diagnosis of LP but could be a useful auxiliary tool in the in vivo differential diagnosis, especially in clinical equivocal settings like mucosal lesions, and in monitoring the response to treatment. Our review shows the possibility of using modern imaging techniques for the in vivo diagnosis and also for evaluation of the treatment response.

Quality assurance in melanoma care: The EU-MELACARE study.

BACKGROUND: A significant disparity regarding survival outcome for melanoma among European regions is well recognized and access to high quality care for European melanoma patients needs to be improved. There is an unmet need for the implementation of minimal standard of care within defined clinical pathways and Quality Assurance (QA) indicators. OBJECTIVE: The EU-MELACARE study aims to identify shared variables for cutaneous melanoma cases recorded in melanoma registries across Europe. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Opinion leaders involved in melanoma data registration and care quality analysis in 34 European countries were invited to respond to an expert survey covering questions regarding the melanoma registration practice in their countries and the characteristics, coverage and variables collected by the relevant melanoma registries. RESULTS: Data regarding 13 melanoma registries from 11 European countries contributed to the study. The majority (61,5%) were population based registries and more than half (62%) had national coverage. The included registries collected a median of 38 variables (Interquartile Range, IRQ 21-76). We identified 24 shared variables available in >70% of registries. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides valuable specific information on information recorded for melanoma cases are registered within Europe. A core of shared variables has been identified, which will constitute the basis for a standardized set of QA indicators for assessing and monitoring melanoma care across European countries.

The status of dermoscopy in Germany - results of the cross-sectional Pan-Euro-Dermoscopy Study.

BACKGROUND: Survey on the current status of dermoscopy in Germany. METHODS: In the context of a pan-European internet-based study (n = 7,480) conducted by the International Dermoscopy Society, 880 German dermatologists were asked to answer questions with respect to their level of training as well as their use and perceived benefit of dermoscopy. RESULTS: Seven hundred and sixty-two (86.6 %) participants practiced dermatology in a publicly funded health care setting; 98.4 % used a dermoscope in routine clinical practice. About 93 % (n = 814) stated to have had more than five years of experience in the use of dermoscopy. Dermoscopy was considered useful in the diagnosis of melanoma by 93.6 % (n = 824); for pigmented skin tumors, by 92.4 % (n = 813); in the follow-up of melanocytic lesions, by 88.6 % (n = 780); for non-pigmented lesions, by 71.4 % (n = 628), in the follow-up of non-melanocytic lesions, by 52.7 % (n = 464); and for inflammatory skin lesions, by 28.5 % (n = 251). Overall, 86.5 % (n = 761) of participants felt that - compared to naked-eye examination - dermoscopy increased the number of melanomas diagnosed; 77,7 % (n = 684) considered the number of unnecessary excisions of benign lesions to be decreased. Participants who personally felt that dermoscopy improved their ability to diagnose melanoma were significantly i) younger, ii) had been practicing dermatology for a shorter period of time, iii) were less commonly employed by an university-affiliated dermatology department, iv) were more frequently working in an office-based public health care setting, and v) had more frequently been trained in dermoscopy during their dermatology residency. CONCLUSIONS: The findings presented herein ought to be integrated into future residency and continuing medical education programs with the challenge to improve dermato-oncological care and to expand the diagnostic spectrum of dermoscopy to include inflammatory skin diseases.

ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care: Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care (ERQCC) are explanations and descriptions of challenges, organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to patients who have a specific type of cancer. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. ERQCC papers give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of the elements needed in any healthcare system to provide high quality of care throughout the patient journey. References are made to clinical guidelines and other resources where appropriate, and the focus is on care in Europe. MELANOMA: ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALITY CARE: CONCLUSION: Taken together, the information presented in this paper provides a comprehensive description of the essential requirements for establishing a high-quality service for melanoma. The ERQCC expert group is aware that it is not possible to propose a 'one size fits all' system for all countries, but urges that access to multidisciplinary teams and specialised treatments is guaranteed to all patients with melanoma.

Cancer registries in Europe-going forward is the only option.

Cancer registries (CR) are the fundamental source of objective cancer data, and thus are indispensable for the evaluation of the cancer burden and for design of effective cancer control plans. Their potential roles spread far beyond epidemiological research, from the exploration of the causes of cancer to health economics, from the evaluation of mass screening programmes to monitoring the quality and outcomes of health services, from addressing the inequalities in access to healthcare, to patients' quality of life analyses, from treatment safety to the development of biomarkers. In Europe, cancer registration is challenged by significant disparities in the quality and coverage of CRs, by insufficient harmonisation and comparability of procedures and data, by heterogeneous legislation that limits CR's abilities for networking, collaboration, and participation in research. These arise against the background of large variations in economical, regulatory, social, and cultural national contexts. Important steps have been taken at European Union (EU)-level in recent years towards mapping and understanding these challenges, identifying best practices and formulating sensible recommendations, and creating the policy frameworks and the tools for cooperation and information sharing. Yet, as cancer has now become the second cause of death in Europe, one third of the population still lacks quality cancer registration, mostly in the regions with lowest resources and health status. It is therefore imperative that the efforts to support the development of CRs continue, and that the wealth of knowledge and vision acquired in this area is transformed into action.