Melanoma is one of the deadliest forms of cancer; hence, great effort has been put into the development of diagnosis methods for this disease. This paper addresses two different systems for the detection of melanomas in dermoscopy images. The first system uses global methods to classify skin lesions, whereas the second system uses local features and the bag-of-features classifier. This paper aims at determining the best system for skin lesion classification. The other objective is to compare the role of color and texture features in lesion classification and determine which set of features is more discriminative. It is concluded that color features outperform texture features when used alone and that both methods achieve very good results, i.e., Sensitivity = 96% and Specificity = 80% for global methods against Sensitivity = 100% and Specificity = 75% for local methods. The classification results were obtained on a data set of 176 dermoscopy images from Hospital Pedro Hispano, Matosinhos.

Multiple studies have compared the performance of artificial intelligence (AI)-based models for automated skin cancer classification to human experts, thus setting the cornerstone for a successful translation of AI-based tools into clinicopathological practice. The objective of the study was to systematically analyse the current state of research on reader studies involving melanoma and to assess their potential clinical relevance by evaluating three main aspects: test set characteristics (holdout/out-of-distribution data set, composition), test setting (experimental/clinical, inclusion of metadata) and representativeness of participating clinicians. PubMed, Medline and ScienceDirect were screened for peer-reviewed studies published between 2017 and 2021 and dealing with AI-based skin cancer classification involving melanoma. The search terms skin cancer classification, deep learning, convolutional neural network (CNN), melanoma (detection), digital biomarkers, histopathology and whole slide imaging were combined. Based on the search results, only studies that considered direct comparison of AI results with clinicians and had a diagnostic classification as their main objective were included. A total of 19 reader studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 CNN-based approaches addressed the classification of dermoscopic images; 6 concentrated on the classification of clinical images, whereas 2 dermatopathological studies utilised digitised histopathological whole slide images. All 19 included studies demonstrated superior or at least equivalent performance of CNN-based classifiers compared with clinicians. However, almost all studies were conducted in highly artificial settings based exclusively on single images of the suspicious lesions. Moreover, test sets mainly consisted of holdout images and did not represent the full range of patient populations and melanoma subtypes encountered in clinical practice.

Dermoscopy image analysis (DIA) is a growing field, with works being published every week. This makes it difficult not only to keep track of all the contributions, but also for new researchers to identify relevant information and new directions to be explored. Several surveys have been written in the past decade, but these tend to cover all of the steps of a CAD system, which can be overwhelming. Moreover, in these works, each of the steps is briefly discussed due to lack of space. Among the different blocks of the CAD system, the most relevant is the one devoted to feature extraction. This is also the block where existing works exhibit the most variability. Therefore, we believe that it is important to review the state-of-the-art on this matter. This work thoroughly explores the several types of features that have been used in DIA. A discussion on their relevance and limitations, as well as suggestions for future research are provided.

We investigated whether human preferences hold the potential to improve diagnostic artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support using skin cancer diagnosis as a use case. We utilized nonuniform rewards and penalties based on expert-generated tables, balancing the benefits and harms of various diagnostic errors, which were applied using reinforcement learning. Compared with supervised learning, the reinforcement learning model improved the sensitivity for melanoma from 61.4% to 79.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 73.5–85.6%) and for basal cell carcinoma from 79.4% to 87.1% (95% CI: 80.3–93.9%). AI overconfidence was also reduced while simultaneously maintaining accuracy. Reinforcement learning increased the rate of correct diagnoses made by dermatologists by 12.0% (95% CI: 8.8–15.1%) and improved the rate of optimal management decisions from 57.4% to 65.3% (95% CI: 61.7–68.9%). We further demonstrated that the reward-adjusted reinforcement learning model and a threshold-based model outperformed naïve supervised learning in various clinical scenarios. Our findings suggest the potential for incorporating human preferences into image-based diagnostic algorithms.