Cargando…
The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation
Physician rating of cutaneous erythema is central to clinical dermatological assessment as well as quantification of outcome measures in clinical trials in a number of dermatologic conditions. However, issues with inter‐rater reliability and variability in the setting of higher Fitzpatrick skin type...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8049083/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33113259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/exd.14224 |
_version_ | 1783679362511405056 |
---|---|
author | Frew, John Penzi, Lauren Suarez‐Farinas, Mayte Garcet, Sandra Brunner, Patrick M. Czarnowicki, Tali Kim, Jaehwan Bottomley, Claire Finney, Robert Cueto, Inna Fuentes‐Duculan, Judilyn Ohmatsu, Hanako Lentini, Tim Yanofsky, Valerie Krueger, James G. Guttman‐Yassky, Emma Gareau, Daniel |
author_facet | Frew, John Penzi, Lauren Suarez‐Farinas, Mayte Garcet, Sandra Brunner, Patrick M. Czarnowicki, Tali Kim, Jaehwan Bottomley, Claire Finney, Robert Cueto, Inna Fuentes‐Duculan, Judilyn Ohmatsu, Hanako Lentini, Tim Yanofsky, Valerie Krueger, James G. Guttman‐Yassky, Emma Gareau, Daniel |
author_sort | Frew, John |
collection | PubMed |
description | Physician rating of cutaneous erythema is central to clinical dermatological assessment as well as quantification of outcome measures in clinical trials in a number of dermatologic conditions. However, issues with inter‐rater reliability and variability in the setting of higher Fitzpatrick skin types make visual erythema assessment unreliable. We developed and validated a computer‐assisted image‐processing algorithm (EQscore) to reliably quantify erythema (across a range of skin types) in the dermatology clinical setting. Our image processing algorithm evaluated erythema based upon green light suppression differentials between affected and unaffected skin. A group of four dermatologists used a 4‐point Likert scale as a human evaluation of similar erythematous patch tests. The algorithm and dermatologist scores were compared across 164 positive patch test reactions. The intra‐class correlation coefficient of groups and the correlation coefficient between groups were calculated. The EQscore was validated on and independent image set of psoriasis, minimal erythema dose testing and steroid‐induced blanching images. The reliability of the erythema quantification method produced an intra‐class correlation coefficient of 0.84 for the algorithm and 0.67 for dermatologists. The correlation coefficient between groups was 0.85. The EQscore demonstrated high agreement with clinical scoring and superior reliability compared with clinical scoring, avoiding the pitfalls of erythema underrating in the setting of pigmentation. The EQscore is easily accessible (http://lab.rockefeller.edu/krueger/EQscore), user‐friendly, and may allow dermatologists to more readily and accurately rate the severity of dermatological conditions and the response to therapeutic treatments. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8049083 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80490832021-04-20 The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation Frew, John Penzi, Lauren Suarez‐Farinas, Mayte Garcet, Sandra Brunner, Patrick M. Czarnowicki, Tali Kim, Jaehwan Bottomley, Claire Finney, Robert Cueto, Inna Fuentes‐Duculan, Judilyn Ohmatsu, Hanako Lentini, Tim Yanofsky, Valerie Krueger, James G. Guttman‐Yassky, Emma Gareau, Daniel Exp Dermatol Regular Articles Physician rating of cutaneous erythema is central to clinical dermatological assessment as well as quantification of outcome measures in clinical trials in a number of dermatologic conditions. However, issues with inter‐rater reliability and variability in the setting of higher Fitzpatrick skin types make visual erythema assessment unreliable. We developed and validated a computer‐assisted image‐processing algorithm (EQscore) to reliably quantify erythema (across a range of skin types) in the dermatology clinical setting. Our image processing algorithm evaluated erythema based upon green light suppression differentials between affected and unaffected skin. A group of four dermatologists used a 4‐point Likert scale as a human evaluation of similar erythematous patch tests. The algorithm and dermatologist scores were compared across 164 positive patch test reactions. The intra‐class correlation coefficient of groups and the correlation coefficient between groups were calculated. The EQscore was validated on and independent image set of psoriasis, minimal erythema dose testing and steroid‐induced blanching images. The reliability of the erythema quantification method produced an intra‐class correlation coefficient of 0.84 for the algorithm and 0.67 for dermatologists. The correlation coefficient between groups was 0.85. The EQscore demonstrated high agreement with clinical scoring and superior reliability compared with clinical scoring, avoiding the pitfalls of erythema underrating in the setting of pigmentation. The EQscore is easily accessible (http://lab.rockefeller.edu/krueger/EQscore), user‐friendly, and may allow dermatologists to more readily and accurately rate the severity of dermatological conditions and the response to therapeutic treatments. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-11-30 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8049083/ /pubmed/33113259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/exd.14224 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Experimental Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Regular Articles Frew, John Penzi, Lauren Suarez‐Farinas, Mayte Garcet, Sandra Brunner, Patrick M. Czarnowicki, Tali Kim, Jaehwan Bottomley, Claire Finney, Robert Cueto, Inna Fuentes‐Duculan, Judilyn Ohmatsu, Hanako Lentini, Tim Yanofsky, Valerie Krueger, James G. Guttman‐Yassky, Emma Gareau, Daniel The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
title | The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
title_full | The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
title_fullStr | The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
title_full_unstemmed | The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
title_short | The erythema Q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
title_sort | erythema q‐score, an imaging biomarker for redness in skin inflammation |
topic | Regular Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8049083/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33113259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/exd.14224 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT frewjohn theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT penzilauren theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT suarezfarinasmayte theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT garcetsandra theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT brunnerpatrickm theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT czarnowickitali theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT kimjaehwan theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT bottomleyclaire theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT finneyrobert theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT cuetoinna theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT fuentesduculanjudilyn theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT ohmatsuhanako theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT lentinitim theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT yanofskyvalerie theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT kruegerjamesg theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT guttmanyasskyemma theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT gareaudaniel theerythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT frewjohn erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT penzilauren erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT suarezfarinasmayte erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT garcetsandra erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT brunnerpatrickm erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT czarnowickitali erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT kimjaehwan erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT bottomleyclaire erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT finneyrobert erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT cuetoinna erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT fuentesduculanjudilyn erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT ohmatsuhanako erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT lentinitim erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT yanofskyvalerie erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT kruegerjamesg erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT guttmanyasskyemma erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation AT gareaudaniel erythemaqscoreanimagingbiomarkerforrednessinskininflammation |