ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend limiting melanoma screening in a population with known risk factors, but none indicates methods for efficient recruitment. The purpose of this study is to compare three different methods of recruiting subjects to be screened for melanoma to detect which, if any, is the most efficient. METHODS: From 2010 to 2019, subjects were recruited as follows: (1) regular skin examinations (RS), mainly conducted through the Associazione Contro il Melanoma network; (2) occasional melanoma screening (OS), during annual public campaigns; (3) and selective screening (SS), where people were invited to undergo a skin check after filling in a risk evaluation questionnaire, in cases where the assigned outcome was intermediate/high risk. Melanoma risk factors were compared across different screening methods. Generalized Linear Mixed Models were used for multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2238 subjects (62.7% women) were recruited, median age 44 years (2-85), and 1094 (48.9 %) records were collected through RS, 826 (36.9 %) through OS, and 318 (14.2 %) through SS. A total of 131 suspicious non-melanoma skin cancers were clinically diagnosed, 20 pathologically confirmed, and 2 melanomas detected. SS performed significantly better at selecting subjects with a family history of melanoma and I-II phototypes compared to OS. CONCLUSIONS: Prior evaluation of melanoma known risk factors allowed for effective selection of a population to screen at higher risk of developing a melanoma.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Skin Neoplasms , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Melanoma/diagnosis , Melanoma/epidemiology , Melanoma/prevention & control , Physical Examination , Risk Factors , Skin Neoplasms/diagnosis , Skin Neoplasms/epidemiology , Skin Neoplasms/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The penis is an unusual site of presentation for Kaposi sarcoma, especially in immunocompetent patients. CASE PRESENTATION: A 52-year-old human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-seronegative man presented with a reddish, 8 mm in diameter nodule on the glans penis near the coronal sulcus. Histopathology after excision of the lesion was consistent with Kaposi sarcoma. No other cutaneous or mucosal manifestations were present. After a follow-up period of 2 years, no recurrence was observed. CONCLUSION: This unusual case suggests that Kaposi sarcoma should be considered in the differential diagnosis of macular, papular, and nodular lesions involving the penis.
