Diagnosis Promise and Limitations of Molecular Skin Cancer

Ankit Gupta^*

Department of Dermatology, University of Utah, United State

Abstract

A substantial and growing worldwide health burden is skin cancer. The existing diagnostic method has some noteworthy shortcomings, while being robust and capable of producing clinically useful data. In order to make an accurate diagnosis utilising standard skin cancer diagnostics, a patient's access to this workflow may be constrained by their location or unforeseeable circumstances, such coronavirus illness. In oncology, the use of molecular biomarkers has revolutionised diagnosis and therapy. Rapid advances in molecular biology techniques have expanded our understanding of the molecular mechanisms that underlie cancer pathologies and produced biomarkers that may be used to track the progression of malignant illnesses. The commercially available, clinically verified, and developing molecular biomarkers for skin cancer are covered in this article. What makes a perfect molecular biomarker are outlined. In order to develop a future model of molecular biomarker skin cancer diagnostics, the possible advantages and disadvantages of implementing molecular biomarker tests throughout the course of skin cancer from susceptibility through therapy are addressed. Skin cancer is a growing global public health problem despite rising survival rates. Significant negative effects on patients' morbidity and quality of life also result from skin cancer's high economic expense. Because skin cancer causes such a major disease burden, it is crucial to develop accurate and affordable diagnostics. In the US, skin cancer costs the national health care system $8 billion USD yearly between.

Keywords

Skin cancer • Diagnosis

Discussion

Melanomas and no melanoma skin cancers, basal cell carcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas, and the uncommon but extremely aggressive neuroendocrine skin cancer, Merkel cell carcinoma, are the main types of skin cancer. At the moment, clinical assessment is the main method for determining whether skin cancer is malignant. After clinical triage using instruments like the derma scope, skin lesions with malignant features are identified [1]. The gold standard in skin cancer diagnosis, histology, is used to make a diagnosis from a biopsy [2]. The traditional approach for diagnosing skin cancer reveals significant flaws [3]. The qualitative aspect of morphologic diagnosis causes discrepancy in histopathologic diagnoses, and patient access to this procedure may be hampered, as coronavirus illness recently shown [4]. Societal constraints. Molecular indicators for skin cancer offer the potential to overcome these drawbacks [5]. In addition to the histopathologic and clinical skin. The standard oncology diagnostic and therapeutic process now includes molecular pathology as a fundamental component [6]. The molecular skin cancer biomarker tests now in use and those in development will be covered in this study [7]. Offer an overview of the possible relevance and restrictions of molecular biomarkers throughout the course of skin cancer disease progression [8]. An evidence-based framework for skin cancer diagnosis and care is provided by the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommendations version category, both of which were last accessible in September [9]. Patient history and a physical examination are the first steps in a clinical study. Given how frequently patients appear, complete body checks are strongly advised [10]. Has several skin cancers. Advanced age, a rise in the number of benign moles that are melanoma, red hair and pale skin, a history of UV exposure that was severe intermittent for melanoma and chronic cumulative for SCC, and immunosuppression are all risk factors for skin cancer. A notable risk factor is having a personal or family history of cutaneous preconcert. Patients with the uncommon genodermatotic Epidermodysplasia verruciformis are at an increased risk of developing cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma due to the human papillomavirus. The majority of diagnoses for NMSC in patients with Epidermodysplasia verruciformis are for Outside of Epidermodysplasia verruciformis, the extent and role of human papillomavirus in the pathogenesis of SCC are supported by clinicopathologic evidence but remain unclear and are an active area of research. Up to 50% of patients with Epidermodysplasia verruciformis develop an NMSC. Xerodermatic is a rare autosomal recessive genetic condition. After excision from aesthetically delicate areas like the face, pigment sum frequently requires reconstructive surgery since it raises the risk for skin malignancies in underlying tissue. Patients with facial dysmorphia experience clinically substantial discomfort levels and a worse quality of life due to facial deformity, illness symptoms, treatment side effects, and fear of recurrence.

Conclusion

The use of molecular biomarkers in skin cancer management processes has been prompted by the fact that skin cancer overall continues to be a substantial health care burden. Continued investigation of underlying molecular disease mechanisms, particularly for under characterized NMSCs, could identify additional diagnostic biomarkers and drug gable targets. The field of molecular pathology is constantly developing and has integrated itself into the typical cancer diagnostic procedure. Molecular biology and molecular pathology Through the use of tests created against specific biomarkers, procedures are employed to objectively diagnose illness. The optimal molecular biomarker for skin cancer should meet a number of essential criteria to simplify test interpretation and diagnosis. Useful skin cancer indicators would be specific to each subtype and able to discriminate between malignant and benign lesions given the challenge of determining malignant from benign lesions using morphology.

References

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A et al.  Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 65, 5-29 (2015).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

2. Lomas A, Leonardi Bee J, Bath Hextall F et al. A systematic review of worldwide incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer. Br J Dermatol. 166, 1069-1080 (2012).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

3. McDonald CJ. American Cancer Society perspective on the American College of Preventive Medicine’s policy statements on skin cancer prevention and screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 48, 229-31 (1998).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

4. Kimball AB, Resneck JS The US dermatology workforce: A specialty remains in shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 59, 741-745 (2008)

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

5. Uhlenhake E, Brodell R, Mostow E et al. The dermatology work force: A focus on urban versus rural wait times. J Am Acad Dermatol. 61, 17-22 (2009).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

6. Kirsner RS, Muhkerjee S, Federman DG et al. Skin cancer screening in primary care: Prevalence and barriers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 41, 564-566 (1999).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

7. Wise E, Singh D, Moore M et al. Rates of skin cancer screening and prevention counseling by US medical residents. Arch Derm. 145, 1131-1136 (2009).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

8. Moore MM, Geller AC, Zhang Z et al. Skin cancer examination teaching in US medical education. Arch Derm. 142, 439-444 (2006).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

9. Robison S, Kljakovic M, Barry P et al. Choosing to biopsy or refer suspicious melanocytic lesions in general practice. BMC FAM Pract. 13, 78 (2012).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar

10. Vestergaard ME, Macaskill P, Holt PE et al. Dermoscopy compared with naked eye examination for the diagnosis of primary melanoma: A meta-analysis of studies performed in a clinical setting. Br J Dermatol. 159, 669-76 (2008).

Indexed at, Crossref, Google Scholar