Dermoscopy vs Standard Marking for the Completeness of Excision of Keratinocyte Skin Cancers: The ClearMark Trial
NCT ID: NCT06627036
Last Updated: 2025-01-24
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
PHASE4
1376 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2024-11-21
2031-05-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Why is this study important? Skin cancer is the most common cancer in the UK. Currently, up to 10-11% of surgeries do not remove all of the cancer, which means patients may need more treatment. We do not know whether using a dermatoscope can help surgeons remove all of the cancer more often or not. If it does, it could prevent patients needing more surgery or time in hospital.
What will happen during the study? A computer will randomly allocate each participant to marking using the normal method, or using a dermatoscope. The surgery will then proceed as usual. After the surgery, patients will be asked to fill in a simple questionnaire about their thoughts. We will collect data from patients' notes to monitor the success of the surgery and any more treatments needed.
What will we measure? We will check participants records to see if the cancer was entirely removed. This is reported by a pathologist whenever a skin lump or bump is removed. In time, we will also look at 5-year recurrence of cancer, the need for additional treatments, any problems from the marking process, how happy patients are with the process, and the time it takes to perform the marking.
What is the pilot for? The study will need many hundreds of patients to pick up a meaningful result. Before we commit to recruiting this many people, we want to make sure that the way we run the study is acceptable. This means looking at the number of people we recruit each week, how easy it is to collect their data after their operation, and whether there are any areas that we can't use a dermatoscope, such as the curves around the eye, nose and ears. We will run the study in a smaller number of people (around 200) before deciding whether we can commit to recruiting everyone. This will also give us the chance to see whether we can run the study in more than one hospital.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Confocal Reflectance Microscopy of Shave-Biopsy Sites on Skin in Vivo.
NCT00601185
Optical Imaging of Skin Cancers for Margin Delineation of Non-Melanoma Skin Cancers
NCT00432471
Treating Basal and Squamous Cell Carcinomas With Fractional Laser and Tirbanibulin Ointment
NCT07010692
Dermatoscopy Guided Resection for Skin Cancer
NCT06342297
Immunotherapy +/- EGFR Inhibitor In Advanced/Metastatic cSCC: Tackling Primary And Secondary Resistance
NCT03666325
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
BCCs generally develop after intense ultraviolet (UV) exposure during childhood and adolescence, whereas cSCCs are associated with cumulative UV exposure and chronic sun damage. The incidence of NMSC is rapidly increasing globally, with the UK experiencing an 8% annual rise. The incidence of cSCC appears to be growing faster than BCC, particularly among elderly men who have accumulated substantial sun damage over their lifetimes. This rise in incidence is primarily due to increased exposure to UV radiation, both from the sun and artificial sources like tanning beds.
Other significant risk factors for NMSC include advancing age, male gender, fair skin (Fitzpatrick types I and II), a history of skin cancer or severe sunburn, immunosuppression, family history of skin cancer, and exposure to carcinogens such as arsenic and ionizing radiation. However, the true incidence of NMSC is uncertain due to underreporting and inconsistencies in registration practices. In many countries, NMSCs are not always documented, and patients with multiple lesions may be registered only once, leading to a potential underestimation of the actual burden.
Despite their low mortality rates, NMSCs cause significant morbidity and represent a growing economic burden on healthcare systems worldwide (3). They frequently appear on the head and neck, where they can cause considerable local tissue destruction and disfigurement if treatment is inadequate or delayed. While BCCs are generally localized and rarely metastasize, cSCCs have the potential to spread to distant sites and become fatal.
The typical presentation of NMSC includes ulcers, nodules, or scaly patches that do not heal and continue to grow at varying rates. These lesions may bleed, itch, or cause significant local destruction. BCCs predominantly arise on the head, face, and neck, though some subtypes, such as superficial BCCs, are more common on the trunk and legs. Conversely, cSCCs typically occur on sun-exposed areas of the face, such as the ears, lips, and scalp, as well as on the neck, shins, and dorsum of the hands and forearms. However, both types can potentially develop anywhere on the body.
5.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF DIAGNOSIS AND MANAGEMENT Patients who present to primary care with a suspicious skin lesion should be referred either routinely for suspected BCC or urgently to a two-week wait clinic for suspected SCC or BCC when there is concern that delay might significantly impact the patient's prognosis. These patients undergo a thorough assessment by a specialist, either a dermatologist or a plastic surgeon. This assessment includes a focused history and clinical examination, dermoscopy, and medical photography. If the lesion is deemed suspicious, the patient is scheduled for a biopsy-either excisional or incisional-to establish a histological diagnosis. Management then depends on the biopsy results and, for SCCs, the TNM (Tumour, Node, Metastasis) staging, guided by the Local Skin Multidisciplinary Team (LSMDT) or the Specialist Skin Cancer Multidisciplinary Team (SSMDT).
A comprehensive history and meticulous clinical examination are crucial for the accurate diagnosis of referred skin lesions. Dermoscopy, widely used by dermatologists and plastic surgeons, is a non-invasive diagnostic tool for various skin lesions, including skin cancer. A dermatoscope is a handheld device that provides magnification from 10x to over 200x and has an adjustable built-in illumination system. By transilluminating the lesion, it visualises structures to the depth of the reticular dermis. Modern dermatoscopes achieve this without additional translucency-enhancing solutions by using polarised light, which filters out scattered light and allows visualisation of sub-stratal features. Dermoscopy helps discriminate between different skin lesions based on color, pattern, and structural analysis. When used by trained clinicians, dermoscopy significantly improves the accuracy of skin cancer diagnosis for both melanoma and keratinocyte cancers. It increases sensitivity for skin cancer detection, decreases the benign-to-malignant biopsy ratio, identifies cancers at an earlier stage, and allows for the diagnosis of different BCC subtypes compared to naked eye examination (NEE). Dermatoscopic characteristics of lesions show good correlation with histopathological features of skin lesions, making dermoscopy an invaluable part of the diagnostic approach to suspicious skin lesions.
Once a lesion is inspected and deemed suspicious for skin cancer, a biopsy is offered to confirm the diagnosis and assess risk. The first-line treatment is often an excision biopsy, where the entire lesion is removed with a margin of normal-appearing skin. This approach aims to achieve complete excision and treatment without the need for further surgery or treatment. Other biopsy options include incisional, punch, and shave biopsies, which provide a smaller sample of the lesion for histopathological analysis. Reconstruction, if needed, can be immediate or delayed, based on the clarity of the clinical margins.
The BAD has published guidelines based on studies using Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) regarding recommended peripheral skin margins for BCCs and SCCs, depending on clinical and pathological criteria that classify them as low, high, or very high (only for SCCs) risk. For BCCs, the recommended margins are 4-5mm for low-risk lesions and 5-10mm for high-risk lesions. For SCCs, the recommended margins are ≥4mm for low-risk, ≥6mm for high-risk, and ≥10mm for very high-risk lesions. These margins are assessed preoperatively, typically using theatre lights and loupe magnification, as per BAD recommendations.
Other treatment options include Mohs micrographic surgery, especially for recurrent or poorly defined lesions in cosmetically sensitive areas, electrodessication and curettage (EDC), cryosurgery, radiotherapy (RT), photodynamic therapy (PDT), topical chemotherapy (e.g., 5-fluorouracil), and topical immunotherapy (e.g., imiquimod). Non-surgical methods lack histological confirmation of tumor clearance and are typically reserved for low-risk lesions, with the exception of RT, which is used routinely for older adults (≥60) with lesions of any risk category in well-vascularised anatomical sites who decline or are unsuitable for surgery.
5.1.3 RATIONALE Skin cancer is the most prevalent cancer in the UK, with a lifetime risk of 1 in 4 for men and 1 in 5 for women, and an annual incidence increase of 8%. The primary treatment approach involves complete surgical excision, with UK dermatologists alone performing approximately 200,000 NMSC excisions annually. However, incomplete excision rates vary, ranging from 9% for squamous cell carcinomas to 11% for basal cell carcinomas. This could mean up to 20,000 patients annually that are inadequately treated. Incomplete excision exacerbates morbidity, imposing additional burdens such as the need for further surgeries or radiotherapy, psychological distress, productivity loss, and increased costs for the NHS (National Health Service). These costs encompass theatre utilisation, dressing materials, consultant-led clinic appointments, and prolonging already stretched waiting lists.
The British Association of Dermatologists suggests a 95% complete excision rate as the gold standard when adhering to their guidelines for surgical marking, indicating ample room for enhancement. One way of potentially improving the rate of incomplete excision is by marking the lesion pre-excision with a dermatoscope - a handheld device providing high-factor magnification and polarised and non-polarised light specifically designed for the assessment of skin lesions. Although dermoscopic marking of tumour margins shows promise, evidence remains sparse. Furthermore, the use of dermoscopy for surgical margins vs. common practices with theatre lights and loupes has not been formally compared with robust and high-quality prospective studies. We are therefore proposing a study to evaluate the effectiveness of using dermoscopy for lesion marking, prior to lesion excision. Notably, our inquiry has been identified as the second most crucial research question in skin cancer surgery by a James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP). By comparing standard practices, using loupes and theatre lights, with dermoscopy for preoperative marking of skin lesions we will therefore specifically help to address the PSP priority of "What is the most effective way of determining the borders of the skin cancer before skin cancer surgery?".
5.1.4 OBJECTIVES To conduct a single-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing dermoscopy-guided excision with loupe-magnified excision in patients undergoing suspected keratinocyte cancer excision
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
DIAGNOSTIC
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Intervention - Dermoscopy
Those allocated to this arm will have their suspicious skin lesion marked using a dermatoscope - a commercially available CE marked medical device used to magnify skin lesions and examine them with polarised light, in order to better characterise their borders and features
Dermatoscope
For participants in the dermoscopy group, the marking will also be done preoperatively with a marker pen, but the lesion borders will be determined using a dermatoscope. A peripheral margin based on BAD guidelines will be marked similarly.
Control - Loupe magnification
Those allocated to this arm will have their suspicious skin lesion marked using the conventional method of surgical loupe magnification (2.5x - 3.5x) and theatre lights
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Dermatoscope
For participants in the dermoscopy group, the marking will also be done preoperatively with a marker pen, but the lesion borders will be determined using a dermatoscope. A peripheral margin based on BAD guidelines will be marked similarly.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* Lesions that are determined to be benign or pigmented upon initial evaluation and therefore do not meet the criteria for suspected keratinocyte skin cancer.
* Lesions scheduled for incisional, punch, or shave biopsy procedures, as these methods do not provide complete peripheral margin clearance.
* Lesions that are histologically confirmed as benign following excision and examination by a pathologist.
* Patients who decline to participate in the study.
* Patients who are unable to provide informed consent due to a lack of mental capacity or other reasons.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
OTHER_GOV
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Joshua Totty, MBBS MRCS PGCert MD(Res) FHEA
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hull York Medical School
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Castle Hill Hospital
Hull, , United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Joshua Totty
Role: primary
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
To be confirmed
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.