Back to Authors

Pellacani, Giovanni

0000-0002-7222-2951

Mayo Clinic

Sapienza University of Rome

Citations 2

International Dermoscopy Society consensus recommendations for the management of lentigo maligna
Forsea, Ana‐Maria , Akay, Bengü Nisa , Argenziano, Giuseppe, Briatico, Giulia , Cabo, Horacio , Cabrera, Raul, Carrera, C., Cinotti, Elisa, Conforti, Claudio, Errichetti, Enzo , Ferrara, Gerardo, Guida, Stefania, Guitera, Pascale, Heyes, Stephen J., Hofmann‐Wellenhof, R, Hong, A., Jaimes, Natalia , Karls, Raimonds, Kittler, Harald, Kränke, Teresa, Malvehy, Josep, Marghoob, Ashfaq A., Moneib, Hoda, Ramirez, David Moreno, Navarrete‐Dechent, Cristian, Pellacani, Giovanni, Peris, Ketty, Puig, S, Rudnicka, Lidia, Sadek, Ahmed, Saiag, Philippe, Soyer, Hans Peter, Starace, Michela V., Stolz, Wilhelm, Swanson, David C. , Thomas, Luc, Zalaudek, Iris, Lallas, Aimilios, Akay, Bengu Nisa , Apalla, Zoe , Argenziano, Giuseppe , Briatico, Giulia , Carrera, Cristina , Conforti, Claudio , Halpern, Allan C , Kränke, Teresa , Liopyris, Konstantinos , Liu, Jie , Moscarella, Elvira , Nagore, Eduardo , Navarrete-Dechent, Cristian , Paoli, John , Pellacani, Giovanni , Peris, Ketty , Puig, Susana , Rudnicka, Lidia , Scope, Alon , Starace, Michela V , Swanson, David L, Thomas, Luc , Tschandl, Philipp , Lallas, Aimilios , Pampena, Riccardo , Braun, Ralph Peter , Cabrera, Raúl , Cinotti, Élisa , Ferrara, Gerardo , Giuffrida, Roberta , Guida, Stefania , Guitera, Pascale , Heyes, Stephen, Karls, Raimonds, Kittler, Harald , Kränke, Teresa, Longo, Caterina , Malvehy, Josep , Marghoob, Ashfaq A. , Navarrete‐Dechent, Cristián , Peris, Ketty , Puig, Susana , Rosendahl, Cliff O. , Saïag, Philippe , Salerni, Gabriel , Scope, Alon , Soyer, H. Peter , Stolz, Wilhelm , Zalaudek, Iris

Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology | March 19, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1111/jdv.70406 Get It

Abstract Lentigo maligna (LM) is a subtype of cutaneous melanoma in situ that develops on chronically sun‐damaged skin in elderly individuals. Its diagnosis and management remain challenging due to its slow progression, frequent occurrence on cosmetically sensitive areas in frail individuals, and tendency for subclinical peripheral extension. Despite its potential for invasive transformation, the natural history of LM remains incompletely understood and evidence‐based management strategies for this specific entity remain limited. This work aims to bridge the gap between scarce high‐quality evidence and the clinicians' need for practical guidance on LM management by formulating evidence‐based and expert consensus‐driven recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow‐up. Under the coordination of the International Dermoscopy Society, a global, multidisciplinary consortium of 53 experts—including dermatologists, dermato‐oncologists, dermatologic surgeons, radiologists, radiotherapists, pathologists and epidemiologists—formulated recommendations through structured consensus, informed by a comprehensive review of current scientific evidence and clinical practice standards. Optimal management of LM requires accurate diagnosis and individualized treatment planning. Non‐invasive skin imaging techniques, especially dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy, aid in diagnosis, biopsy orientation, lesion delineation and post‐treatment monitoring. Multiple partial biopsies help confirm diagnosis and rule out invasion. Complete surgical excision remains the first treatment option. No definitive safety margins can be recommended for standard surgery; margin‐controlled techniques are preferable for large or ill‐defined lesions. Topical imiquimod and radiotherapy are effective alternatives where surgery is unsuitable. Topical imiquimod is useful as primary, adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy. Blind destructive methods should be avoided. Close clinical and imaging follow‐up is needed. Patient‐centred care, shared decision‐making, and a multidisciplinary approach are critical for optimal outcomes. These international consensus recommendations summarize current best practices for LM management, offering practical, evidence‐informed guidance to clinicians while acknowledging the potential of future research in refining these conclusions.
Clinical Utility of a Digital Dermoscopy Image-Based Artificial Intelligence Device in the Diagnosis and Management of Skin Cancer by Dermatologists
Witkowski, Alexander , Burshtein, Joshua , Cockerell, Clay J. , Correa‐Selm, Lilia , Cotter, David G. , Ellis, Darrell L., Farberg, Aaron S. , Grant-Kels, Jane M, Greiling, Teri M. , Grichnik, James M. , Leachman, Sancy A. , Linfante, Anthony , Marghoob, Ashfaq A. , Paragh, György , Rabinovitz, Harold , Rigel, Darrell S. , Siegel, Daniel M. , Song, Eingun James , Swanson, David C. , Trask, David, Łudzik, Joanna , Correa, Lilia , Greiling, Teri M , Grichnik, James M , Leachman, Sancy A , Paragh, Gyorgy , Siegel, Daniel M , Song, Eingun James , Swanson, David, Ludzik, Joanna , Christopher, Michael, Ellis, Darrell L., Grant-Kels, Jane Margaret , Marks, Etan , Nguyen, Khoa, Ortega‐Loayza, Alex G. , Pellacani, Giovanni , Trask, David

Cancers | October 25, 2024 | Volume: 16 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 3592

10.3390/cancers16213592 Get It

Background: Patients with skin lesions suspicious for skin cancer or atypical melanocytic nevi of uncertain malignant potential often present to dermatologists, who may have variable dermoscopy triage clinical experience. Objective: To evaluate the clinical utility of a digital dermoscopy image-based artificial intelligence algorithm (DDI-AI device) on the diagnosis and management of skin cancers by dermatologists. Methods: Thirty-six United States board-certified dermatologists evaluated 50 clinical images and 50 digital dermoscopy images of the same skin lesions (25 malignant and 25 benign), first without and then with knowledge of the DDI-AI device output. Participants indicated whether they thought the lesion was likely benign (unremarkable) or malignant (suspicious). Results: The management sensitivity of dermatologists using the DDI-AI device was 91.1%, compared to 84.3% with DDI, and 70.0% with clinical images. The management specificity was 71.0%, compared to 68.4% and 64.9%, respectively. The diagnostic sensitivity of dermatologists using the DDI-AI device was 86.1%, compared to 78.8% with DDI, and 63.4% with clinical images. Diagnostic specificity using the DDI-AI device increased to 80.7%, compared to 75.9% and 73.6%, respectively. Conclusion: The use of the DDI-AI device may quickly, safely, and effectively improve dermoscopy performance, skin cancer diagnosis, and management when used by dermatologists, independent of training and experience.