×

Scientific References

NOW AVAILABLE: The Most Objective and Comprehensive Diagnostic Testing Solution
for Difficult-to-Diagnose Melanocytic Lesions. LEARN MORE

myPath Melanoma Clinical Evidence

 

Clarke L, Mabey B, Flake D, et al. Clinical validity of a gene expression signature in diagnostically uncertain neoplasms. Per Med 2020;17:361-71.

 

Ko J, Clarke L, Minca E, et al. Correlation of melanoma gene expression score with clinical outcomes on a series of melanocytic lesions. Hum Pathol 2019;86:213-21.

 

Clarke L, Pimental J, Zalaznick H, et al. Gene expression signature as an ancillary method in the diagnosis of desmoplastic melanoma. Hum Pathol 2017;70:113-20.

 

Ko J, Matharoo-Ball B, Billings S, et al. Diagnostic distinction of malignant melanoma and benign nevi by a gene expression signature and correlation to clinical outcomes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017;26:1107-13.

 

Clarke L, Flake D, Busam K, et al. An independent validation of a gene expression signature to differentiate malignant melanoma from benign melanocytic nevi. Cancer 2016;123:617-28.

 

Warf MB, Flake D, Adams D, et al. Analytical validation of a melanoma diagnostic gene signature using formalin-fixed paraffin embedded melanocytic lesions. Biomark Med 2015;9:407-16.

 

Clarke L, Warf M, Flake D, et al. Clinical validation of a gene expression signature that differentiates benign nevi from malignant melanoma. J Cutan Pathol 2015;42:244-52.

 

myPath Melanoma Clinical Impact Studies and Surveys 

 

Cockerell C, Tschen J, Billings S, et al. The influence of a gene-expression signature on the treatment of diagnostically challenging melanocytic lesions. Per Med 2017;14:123-30.

 

Cockerell C, Tschen J, Evans B, et al. The influence of a gene expression signature on the diagnosis and recommended treatment of melanocytic tumors by dermatopathologists. Medicine 2016;40:e4487.

 

Tschen J, Davies P, Meek S, et al. Clinical use of a diagnostic gene expression signature for melanocytic neoplasms.  Cutis (in press 2021)

 

Guidelines, Criteria, and Staging Systems 

 

Cancer Stat Facts: Melanoma of the Skin  https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/melan.html Posted April 2020.

 

Piepkorn MW, Longton GM, Reisch, LM, et al.  Assessment of second-opinion strategies for diagnoses of cutaneous melanocytic lesions. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2:e1912597.

 

Elmore JG, Barnhill RL, Elder DE, et al. Pathologists’ diagnosis of invasive melanoma and melanocytic proliferations: observer accuracy and reproducibility study. BMJ 2017;357:j2813. 

 

Meyer A, Payne V, Meeks D, et al. Physicians’ diagnostic accuracy, confidence, and resource requests: a vignette study. JAMA Int Med 2013;173:1952-8.

 

Guy GP, Ekwueme DU, Tanga FK, et al. Melanoma treatment costs: a systematic review of the literature, 1990-2011. Am J Prev Med 2012;43:537-45.

 

Haws B, St Romain P, Mammen J et al.  Secondary review of external histopathology on cutaneous oncology patients referred for sentinel lymph node biopsy: how often does it happen and is it worth it? J Cutan Pathol 2012;39:844-9.

 

Gerami P, Barnhill RL, Beilfuss BA, et al. Superficial melanocytic neoplasms with pagetoid melanocytosis: a study of interobserver concordance and correlation with FISH. Am J Surg Pathol 2010;34:816-21.

 

Lodha S, Saggar S, Celebi JT, et al. Discordance in the histopathologic diagnosis of difficult melanocytic neoplasms in the clinical setting. J Cutan Pathol 2008;35:349-52.

 

Brochez L, Verhaeghe E, Grosshans E, et al.  Inter-observer variation in the histopathological diagnosis of clinically suspicious pigmented skin lesions.  J Pathol 2002;196:459-66.

 

Veenhuizen KC, De Wit PE, Mooi WJ, et al. Quality assessment by expert opinion in melanoma pathology: experience of the pathology panel of the Dutch Melanoma Working Party. J Pathol 1997;182:266-72.

DiffDx-Melanoma Clinical Evidence

 

Estrada SI, Shackelton JB, Cleaver NJ, et al. Development and validation of a diagnostic 35-gene expression profile test for ambiguous or difficult-to-diagnose suspicious pigmented skin lesions. SKIN: J Cutan Med 2020;4:506-22.

 

DiffDx-Melanoma Clinical Impact Studies and Surveys

 

Farberg AS, Ahmed KL, Bailey CN, et al. A 35-gene expression profile test for use in suspicious pigmented lesions impacts clinical management decisions of dermatopathologists and dermatologists. SKIN: J Cutan Med 2020;4:523-33.

 

DiffDx-Melanoma Clinical Posters and Presentations

 

Estrada SI, Shackelton JB, Martin HL, et al. Performance of a diagnostic 35-gene expression profile test (GEP) on difficult-to-diagnose melanocytic lesions. Poster at 10th World Congress of Melanoma/17th European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO) Congress; Apr 15-17, 2021; virtual. 

 

Estrada SI, Goldberg MS, Farberg AS, et al. Development, validation, and clinical utility of the 35-gene expression profile test for use as an adjunctive melanoma diagnostic tool. Poster at 10th World Congress of Melanoma/17th European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO) Congress; Apr 15-17, 2021; virtual.

 

Cockerell C, Goldberg MS, Estrada SI, et al. Performance of a 35-gene expression profile test in suspicious pigmented lesions of the head and neck.  Poster at 2021 Winter Clinical Dermatology Conference: January 15-24, 2021; Virtual. Poster #007.

 

Estrada, SI, Shackelton, JB, Cleaver, NJ, et al. Development and validation of a diagnostic gene expression profile test for ambiguous or difficult-to-diagnose pigmented skin lesions. ASDP20 Poster #296.

melhcp-riskidentified.svg

Order Our Comprehensive Diagnostic Offering

For Information

Call: 866-788-9007

Expert Opinions in Melanoma

When Is the myPath Melanoma Test Most Helpful

On-Demand
Educational Programs

What's Next?

Using DecisionDx®-Melanoma to Better Identify the Risk of Recurrence and Metastasis

How Do You Order a
myPath Melanoma and
DiffDx-Melanoma Test?

Scroll to Top