Deep Learning for Dermatology: An Innovative Framework for Approaching Precise Skin Cancer Detection

Early diagnosis of melanoma is critical for improving patient survival rates. However, accurately distinguishing melanoma from other skin lesions remains a significant clinical challenge due to the high visual similarity among lesion types and variability in image acquisition conditions. Artificial intelligence, particularly machine learning, has emerged as a promising tool to support dermatological diagnosis by automating feature extraction from medical images. Among the available approaches, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have demonstrated strong performance in image classification tasks, making them well-suited for analyzing both dermatoscopic and histopathological images, given their ability to capture hierarchical visual patterns relevant to lesion characterization. Nevertheless, despite numerous pre-trained CNN architectures having been proposed, selecting the most appropriate one for a given imaging modality remains an open challenge. In this study, we evaluate pre-trained convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for skin lesion classification using dermatoscopic and histopathological image datasets. Experiments were conducted on the HAM10000, ISIC 2018, and CR-AI4SkIN datasets, evaluating the ResNet50, VGG16, VGG19, MobileNet, and InceptionV3 architectures under the same training protocol. The experimental evaluation showed that the models achieved accuracies ranging from 71% (InceptionV3 on ISIC 2018) to 84% (ResNet50 on HAM10000) on dermatoscopic images. For histopathological images, accuracies ranged from 72% (VGG19) to 83% (ResNet50) on the CR-AI4SkIN dataset. The results demonstrate that model performance differs between dermatoscopic and histopathological image modalities, showing that architectures exhibiting similar performance on dermatoscopic images exhibit different performance on histopathological data.

Skin cancer is a common and fast rising malignancy worldwide. Early detection is critical for improving outcomes. Deep learning models trained on dermoscopic and clinical images can support automated and fast triage. However, many studies evaluate only a limited set of architectures. Experimental setups also vary across studies. In this paper, we present a unified evaluation of twelve deep learning models for binary skin cancer detection on the PAD-UFES-20 dataset. The models span four families: convolutional neural networks (CNN), vision transformers (ViT), hybrid convolution transformer backbones, and vision language models (VLM). Performance is assessed using AUC, the maximum F1 score with its precision and recall, and sensitivity at 80% specificity, reflecting screening oriented requirements. Our results show that well tuned CNNs already provide strong baselines, but transformer based families consistently improve discrimination. Hybrid models (MaxViT Tiny, CoAtNet0) and a SigLIP based VLM achieve the best overall trade off between ranking performance and clinically relevant operating points, while CLIP based model offers high precision. The full codebase for all experiments is publicly released. Together, these findings offer practical guidance on which model families are most suitable for real world deployment in skin cancer screening and establish a reproducible reference point for future work on PAD-UFES-20.

Purpose. To compare deep learning architectures and classification schemes for dermoscopic images of skin neoplasms and assess their generalization on transfer from open international datasets to independent clinical datasets of Russian practice. Methods. Four architectures (ViT-B/16, Swin-S, ConvNeXt-S, EfficientNetV2-S) were compared in three schemes: binary (malignant/benign), single-stage four-class (benign, MEL, SCC, BCC), and a two-stage cascade (binary triage, then three-class differentiation MEL/SCC/BCC). All models used ImageNet-pretrained weights and a single augmentation protocol on aggregated open ISIC Archive data, and were evaluated on an internal held-out sample and two clinical datasets (Melanoscope AI mobile system; Sechenov University). Results. Internally the binary stage attains ROC-AUC 0.952-0.966; on Sechenov University it drops to 0.797-0.893, sensitivity to 0.53-0.67, and ECE rises from 0.02 to 0.27-0.39 with underestimation of malignancy, quantifying a generalization gap in ranking and calibration. Paired tests confirm one inter-architecture result on clinical data: the deficit of ViT-B/16 at the binary stage (p<0.05); at the differentiation stage no architecture has a proven advantage. The cascade raises macro F1 over single-stage four-class classification for most architectures, but significantly only for ViT-B/16, by recovering malignant lesions assigned to the dominant benign class. On ISIC MILK10k, direct 11-class classification yields mean-class sensitivity 0.525. Conclusion. A tunable triage threshold gives sensitivity control not attainable in standard single-stage (argmax) classification and better reproduces clinical differential-diagnosis logic. The persistent generalization gap mandates external clinical validation and recalibration before deployment.