By Carrie Stevenson and Tim Betler Smartphone applications that aim to analyze photographs of skin lesions for the
likelihood of cancer gave results that were often inaccurate, according to the latest research from the University of Pittsburgh that was published today in JAMA Dermatology. Researchers say patients who rely
on these apps and who receive inaccurate “benign” feedback for the image of a
melanoma may put off doctor visits and potentially delay life-saving treatment. “Smartphone apps are so popular
now, and they’re used for absolutely everything. It’s great that they may
encourage people to be more mindful about their health care and have more open
discussions with their physicians, but it’s important that users don’t allow
their ‘apps’ to take the place of real medical advice,” said lead researcher Laura Ferris, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor, Department of Dermatology, University
of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. Researchers tested four different
applications available on the two most popular smartphone platforms. They
uploaded images of 60 melanomas and 128 benign lesions that were photographed
and biopsied ahead of time. Three of the four applications inaccurately
characterized 30 percent or more melanomas as “unconcerning,” with the worst
only being accurate 6.8 percent of the time. Those three tools were available
for free or a very low cost – up to $5 for unlimited use – and gave users
almost instant feedback about their image using various algorithms. The fourth
app was the most accurate, correctly identifying melanomas 98 percent of the
time. It sent user images to a board-certified dermatologist and returned the
analysis within 24 hours, at a cost of $5 per use. “The results show that we aren’t
ready to take the dermatologist out of the picture,” said Dr. Ferris. “This is
a good platform for consideration of store-and-forward teledermatology, where
patients who don’t have easy access to a doctor might submit such images for
analysis by a board-certified dermatologist. But especially with melanoma,
where early detection and treatment is so critical, it’s important that
patients use tools that gave reliable information. There really isn’t a
substitute for seeing your doctor.”