Please login or create an account. If you do not have access to this content, you will be shown a 30 second preview and licensing options.

  • Presentation

Computer Vision Algorithms and Skin Cancer Detection

Description

The presentation discusses the application of computer vision algorithms, particularly convolutional neural networks, in skin cancer detection. It highlights the challenges and vulnerabilities these algorithms face when applied outside controlled settings, revealing a significant discrepancy between their performance in laboratory environments and real-world clinical practice. Studies from respected institutions, like Memorial Sloan Kettering, indicate that many algorithms underperform, especially when diagnosing non-represented conditions, leading to high rates of false positives. A research project involving over 1,000 lesions showed disappointing sensitivity rates, with some algorithms displaying sensitivity as low as 28% for skin cancer detection. Moreover, algorithm performance is adversely affected by variations in skin tone, showcasing a lack of adequate representation in training datasets for diverse populations, which raises concerns about their applicability in clinics serving those groups. The discussion also covers the real-world deployment of an algorithm in the UK's NHS to triage referrals, emphasizing the importance of safety and predictive value; however, it notes issues like missed melanomas. Additionally, promising results were seen in another study where AI augmented dermatologist capabilities, although vulnerabilities remain if algorithms are applied beyond their intended scope. In conclusion, while there are encouraging signs for the use of AI in dermatology, careful validation and transparency regarding algorithm training data relevance are essential to ensure safety and effectiveness.

View more

Conclusions

  • Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) show potential for skin cancer detection comparable to dermatologists under controlled conditions.
  • However, CNNs demonstrate significant vulnerabilities when exposed to real-world clinical variability, resulting in decreased accuracy and higher false positive rates.
  • Algorithms trained on narrow datasets may fail to generalize effectively to diverse patient populations and varied skin tones.
  • Validation using prospective datasets is essential to assess real-world performance of skin cancer detection algorithms.
  • Performance of algorithms can degrade significantly without careful case selection, appropriate task definition, and deployment techniques like fine-tuning.
  • Encouraging performance metrics can be achieved when these algorithms are used within tightly controlled clinical settings.
  • Esteva, A., Ko, J., Novoa, R. (2017). "... an artificial intelligence capable of classifying skin cancer with a level of competence comparable to dermatologists." Nature. 2017 Feb 2; 542(7639): 115-118.
  • Combalia, M., Rotemberg, V., et al. (2022). "[Title of article]." Lancet Digit Health. 2022 May;4(5):e330-e339.
  • Tschandl, P., et al. (2021). "[Title of article]." JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(11):1271-1273.
  • Daneshjou, R., et al. (2022). "[Title of article]." Sci Adv. 2022 Aug 12;8(32):eabq6147.
  • Marchetti, M., Rotemberg, V., et al. (2023). "[Title of article]." NPJ Digit Med. 2023 Jul 12;6(1):127.
  • Edge Health. (2025). "AI in Dermatology: a white paper by Edge Health for NHSE. Available from: https://www.edgehealth.co.uk/news-insights/ai-in-dermatology-white-paper/ (last accessed 18 Feb 2025).