Cancer screening is a vital public health tool designed to detect preclinical disease early, with the ultimate goal of reducing illness and death rates. However, the benefits of early detection must always be carefully balanced against potential harms. These harms can include anxiety from testing, complications from diagnostic procedures, false positive or negative results, and perhaps most significantly, the detection of cancers that would never have caused harm if left undetected – a phenomenon known as overdiagnosis. In the context of melanoma, a serious form of skin cancer, the actual balance of benefits and harms from widespread screening remains a topic of considerable debate, largely due to the lack of definitive evidence from randomized clinical trials.
Recent research provides valuable insights into this complex issue. A compelling analysis by Whiteman and colleagues, drawing on data from a large Australian prospective cohort study, offers a significant contribution to our understanding of melanoma screening. Their study, employing a sophisticated propensity score-based analysis to mimic the conditions of a randomized trial, revealed some concerning trends. Participants who reported having had a prior clinical skin examination were found to be 30% more likely to receive a new melanoma diagnosis compared to those who had not. This likelihood increased to 50% for individuals who underwent a skin biopsy within the first year of the study. Over a five-year period, the cumulative risk difference between screened and unscreened individuals grew to 0.5% (1.94% in the screened group versus 1.45% in the unscreened group). Notably, over 60% of these new diagnoses were for melanoma in situ, the earliest form of melanoma. When the analysis was narrowed to focus solely on invasive melanomas, the difference between screened and unscreened groups largely vanished, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.05 (95% confidence interval 0.72–1.63). This data strongly suggests that melanoma screening leads to substantial Over Diagnosis Of Melanoma, especially concerning the in situ type.
Alt text: Close-up of a dermatologist using a dermatoscope to examine a mole on a patient’s back during a skin cancer screening exam, highlighting the detailed visual inspection involved in melanoma detection.
The study authors themselves acknowledge certain limitations that could actually underestimate the extent of melanoma overdiagnosis. These limitations include the use of self-reported skin exams and incident skin biopsies as proxies for actual screening, the already high baseline rate of skin checks within the study population (73% had prior screenings), and a considerable degree of screening behavior crossover (23% of initially screened participants stopped screening, while 33% of unscreened participants began screening during the study). Longer-term follow-up studies are crucial to gain a more precise understanding of the true extent of overdiagnosis and to potentially uncover any beneficial impacts of screening on reducing advanced melanoma cases and melanoma-related deaths.
Melanoma overdiagnosis is defined as the diagnosis of melanoma in individuals who would never have experienced symptoms or health issues from that particular lesion had it remained undetected and untreated. The harm associated with overdiagnosis is multifaceted. It begins with the psychological and emotional burden of a cancer diagnosis itself. Furthermore, it leads to unnecessary medical interventions such as treatments, further diagnostic tests, and prolonged clinical surveillance, all of which carry their own risks and costs. Epidemiological data from the United States indicates a concerning trend: despite a rapid increase in early-stage melanoma diagnoses, the incidence of clinically significant, later-stage melanomas has not seen a corresponding decrease over the past four decades. The dramatic rise in melanoma in situ diagnoses is particularly striking, with rates now approaching those of invasive melanoma since 2015. Similar patterns are observed in Australia. A recent population-based analysis estimated that a significant proportion of all melanomas diagnosed – 58% in men (22% of invasive melanomas) and 54% in women (15% of invasive melanomas) – represent over diagnosis of melanoma.
Alt text: Line graphs illustrating the trends in melanoma incidence rates over several decades, differentiated by stage (in situ vs. invasive) and sex, visually demonstrating the disproportionate increase in in situ melanoma diagnoses which contributes to concerns about melanoma overdiagnosis.
This epidemiological evidence casts doubt on the anticipated effectiveness of routine skin examinations in preventing advanced-stage melanoma and mortality. Adding to this concern, a recent analysis of Netherlands Cancer Registry data, examining the impact of COVID-19 related screening delays, found that these delays had a limited short-term effect on the tumor characteristics of primary invasive melanomas. This suggests that the rapid detection afforded by widespread screening may not be as critical as previously assumed for all melanomas. To maximize benefits and minimize harms, a more targeted approach to melanoma screening is warranted, focusing on individuals at higher risk. This aligns with recommendations from bodies like the US Preventive Services Task Force, which emphasize the need for research to refine risk-based screening strategies. Given the well-documented risk of melanoma overdiagnosis, it is becoming increasingly clear that screening efforts should be concentrated on those at the highest risk of developing advanced-stage melanoma or dying from this disease.
Cancer registry data, encompassing all melanomas that progress to stage IV regardless of initial stage at diagnosis, can provide valuable data for developing risk prediction tools. Furthermore, in cases where early-stage melanomas progress to later stages, in-depth studies characterizing the individuals (e.g., immune system profiles) and their tumors (e.g., molecular and genetic markers) may help differentiate high-risk lesions requiring aggressive surveillance and treatment from potentially indolent lesions where less intensive management might be appropriate. Currently, melanoma overdiagnosis is primarily identifiable at the population level, necessitating population-level interventions for its prevention. These interventions are urgently needed to mitigate the harms associated with early melanoma detection and to ensure the delivery of sustainable, high-value healthcare in the fight against skin cancer.
References (from original article context):
- Whiteman et al. Br J Dermatol 2022; 187:515–522
- Welch HG, Black WC. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102:605–13.
- Brodersen J, Schwartz LM, Heneghan C, O’Sullivan JW, Ardern J, Woloshin S. BMJ 2018; 362:k3495.
- Bell KJ, Garelik J, Wegwarth O, Brodersen J, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. JAMA Intern Med 2021; 181:173–80.
- Moynihan R, Johansson M, Cooke R, et al. BMJ 2012; 344:e678.
- Richtig G, Geller AC, Langmann G, Waldmann A, Katz R, Peter S. Br J Dermatol 2022; 186:837–45.
- van der Veldt AJ, van den Hurk CJ, Noorlag R, et al. Eur J Cancer 2022; 175:217–25.
- US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2016; 315:513–24.
- Swerdlow AJ, Weinstock MA. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2019; 2019:lgz008.
- Welch HG, Skinner JS, Sieminska J, Fisher ES. BMJ 2017; 359:j5265.
