Summary
Background
Spontaneous lightening of congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) has not been studied systematically. Final colour is considered an important outcome after superficial removal techniques such as curettage, dermabrasion or laser ablation, and is often compared with colour at birth.
Objectives
To quantify the natural history of CMN lightening over time, and explore phenotypic and genotypic predictors of colour change.
Methods
A longitudinal cohort study was undertaken of 110 patients with CMN (mean follow‐up 5·3 years). Accurate colour‐space measurements were taken from professional serial photographs of CMN and normal skin. Changes in colour over time were modelled using multiple logistic regression, against phenotypic and genotypic variables.
Results
Lightening of CMN was significantly associated with lighter normal skin colour (P < 0·001) and with MC1R variant alleles (red/blonde hair gene) (P < 0·001), but not with CMN colour in the first 3 months of life, NRAS genotype or projected adult size of CMN. Importantly, the final colours of adjacent treated and untreated areas of CMN were indistinguishable.
Conclusions
Final CMN colour in childhood is related to the genetically determined skin colour of the individual, is unrelated to the colour of CMN at birth, and is unaffected by superficial removal.
What's already known about this topic?
Final colour of congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) is considered an important outcome after superficial removal techniques such as curettage, dermabrasion or laser ablation, and is often compared with colour at birth.
The phenomenon of spontaneous lightening in CMN, in which naevi lighten gradually and sometimes dramatically during childhood, has been described but not systematically studied.
What does this study add?
Final CMN colour in childhood is significantly associated with the individual's normal skin colour, and with MC1R genotype, and is therefore genetically determined.
Final CMN colour is not predictable from CMN colour in the first 3 months of life.
Superficial removal techniques do not alter the final colour of CMN.
Short abstract
Linked Comment: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.18706.
Congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) are usually darkly pigmented at birth. Where lesions are multiple or extensive, excision or superficial removal techniques are frequently employed for cosmetic reasons. Final colour of the naevus is considered by clinicians to be an important cosmetic outcome in the context of superficial removal, with lighter CMN deemed to be less noticeable and therefore more desirable, and a lighter final colour deemed an improvement.1, 2 However, owing to the long‐held and as‐yet‐unsubstantiated belief that early surgical intervention in CMN has better cosmetic outcomes, the decisions to excise or to perform superficial removal are often based on the appearance of the CMN in the immediate postnatal period,3, 4, 5, 6 and results assessed by comparison with photographs from that time.
Highly relevant in this context is the known phenomenon of spontaneous lightening in CMN, in which naevi lighten gradually, sometimes dramatically, during childhood.7, 8, 9, 10 This is particularly common in scalp naevi,11 the reason for which is unknown; however, it has been described at many different sites. This phenomenon could have major implications for cosmetic surgery decisions taken at or near birth. Spontaneous lightening should be distinguished from the very rare cases of actual regression of the naevus.11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 It should also be noted that a small percentage of CMN are tardive, defined as appearing fully or partially after birth. These are the only naevi in our experience that appear to darken after birth, although they are, in fact, only developing their full phenotype.7, 8
What is known about the natural history of pigmentation is that the immediate postnatal period is not representative of the individual's genetic pigmentary phenotype. For example, a baby's hair colour, eye colour and even skin colour will alter in the first year of life, often dramatically. This is thought to be at least partly due to the effects of maternal hormones on pigmentation in the baby, and, after gradual withdrawal of these, the child's genetically determined pigmentation becomes established. In addition, further evolution of pigmentation occurs throughout childhood, with blonde hair, for example, often darkening over time.
We hypothesized that the colour of CMN in the postnatal period may not be related to its final colour, and that final colour may instead be genetically determined. We sought to devise a method to measure lightening in CMN accurately and objectively, to establish the natural colour history of CMN in a large cohort of children, and to look for genotypic and phenotypic associations of lightening.
Patients and methods
Patient cohort and colour‐space measurements
A method of standardized accurate measurement of lightening of CMN over time was devised and optimized, based on published measurements of accuracy of the system chosen.23, 24, 25, 26 Serial photographs taken in a professional hospital setting with controlled and standardized lighting conditions (no external light) underwent measurement, and the data were analysed in a blinded manner. For each patient, the same areas of CMN and normal background skin were measured over time, with averaging of colour over measurement areas (Adobe Photoshop Elements; Adobe, San Jose, CA, U.S.A.) to reduce the effect of any natural colour heterogeneity (Fig. 1a). Using the the L*a*b* colour‐space model (CIE‐LAB), mathematical descriptions of all perceivable colours in three dimensions were taken using Digital Colour Meter (version 5·11; Apple, Cupertino, CA, U.S.A.). Briefly ‘L*’ stands for lucency, representing lightness, a measure of the spectrum between black and white, where L* = 0 is pure black and L* = 100 is pure white. Simultaneously, ‘a*’ is a measure of the spectrum between red and green, and ‘b*’ between blue and yellow (Fig. 1b).
Figure 1.
Method of measurement of L*a*b colour‐space values from standardized serial photographs. (a) For each patient, the same representative areas of congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) and normal background skin were measured over time, with averaging of colour over measurement areas (Adobe Photoshop Elements; Adobe, San Jose, CA, U.S.A.) to reduce the effect of any natural colour heterogeneity in the area. Red arrows indicate areas of ‘colour‐averaged’ CMN and normal skin. (b) Representation of L*a*b* measurements along the three‐dimensional colour‐space axes, where L* is a mathematical value along the black/white spectrum, a* along red and green, and b* along blue and yellow. L* (lucency, lightness) was found to vary the most over time in CMN.
In total, 110 patients for the longitudinal cohort were identified from our tertiary referral paediatric dermatology service. Inclusion criteria were children with a diagnosis of CMN, where NRAS, BRAF or MC1R genotype was available, and where at least one set of professional in‐house hospital photographs was available. Extensive data on phenotype were collected using two separate classifications, the most recently proposed classification from 2013,27 and an in‐house classification used over the past 25 years and previously published.28, 29, 30, 31 Final colour was defined as the latest measurement available for each patient. Immediate postnatal colour was defined as the first colour measurement within the first 3 months of life where this was available.
Genotyping
Genotyping data were available on CMN tissue from concurrent studies.32, 33 Germline MC1R genotyping was undertaken on leucocyte DNA using Sanger sequencing (primer sequences as reported previously).34
Statistical analysis
CMN mean colour‐space values were first analysed by anova to identify that L* (lucency) was the most significantly altered of the three colour‐space variables over time. Final L* was then modelled using multiple logistic regression, with the independent variables of sex, age at final photograph, self‐reported ethnicity, L* in the first 3 months of life, final L* of the normal skin, the projected adult size of the largest CMN (as the most widely reported phenotypic variable), NRAS mutation positivity and at least one MC1R variant allele positivity (SPSS version 24·0; IBM, Armonk, NY, U.S.A.). Bonferroni correction for multiple testing reduced the 95% significance level to a P‐value of < 0·006.
Research ethics approval
This study was approved by the London Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee.
Results
In total, 110 patients with CMN were included in the longitudinal cohort. Detailed phenotypic and demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. Briefly, 38·2% (n = 42) of participants were male and 79·4% (n = 85/107) had multiple CMN. Mean and median follow‐up was 5·3 and 4·2 years, respectively (range 0·2–16·0). Deep phenotyping was undertaken in all, MC1R genotyping in 57·3% (n = 63) and NRAS genotype was available from affected tissue in 88·2% (n = 97) of participants. The total number of photos analysed was 266, with a mean number per patient of three (median two, range 1–7). Mean and median age at the first photograph were 3·1 and 1·3 years, respectively, and at last photograph were 6·8 and 5·8 years, respectively.
Table 1.
Demographic, phenotypic and genotypic characterization of the longitudinal cohort of patients with congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN)
| Sex | |
| Male | 42 (38·2) |
| Female | 68 (61·8) |
| Self‐reported ethnicity | |
| White British | 67 (60·9) |
| White other | 9 (8·2) |
| White and black Caribbean | 2 (1·8) |
| White and Asian | 1 (0·9) |
| Indian | 3 (2·7) |
| Pakistani | 2 (1·8) |
| Bangladeshi | 3 (2·7) |
| Any other Asian | 2 (1·8) |
| Black Caribbean | 1 (0·9) |
| Black African | 2 (1·8) |
| Any other black | 4 (3·6) |
| Chinese | 1 (0·9) |
| Not specified | 11 |
| Multiple CMN (n = 107) | |
| Multiple | 85 (79·4) |
| Single | 22 (20·6) |
| Missing | 3 |
| Projected adult size (cm) | |
| < 10 | 27 (24·5) |
| 10–20 | 20 (18·2) |
| 20–40 | 16 (14·5) |
| 40–60 | 13 (11·8) |
| > 60 | 32 (29·1) |
| Multiple medium | 2 (1·8) |
| Satellite numbers at enrolment | |
| 0 | 22 (21·4) |
| < 10 | 18 (17·5) |
| 10–20 | 11 (10·7) |
| 20–50 | 10 (9·7) |
| 50–100 | 15 (14·6) |
| 100–200 | 16 (15·5) |
| > 200 | 11 (10·7) |
| Missing | 7 |
| NRAS genotype | |
| Codon 61 mutation | 71 (73·2) |
| Mutation‐negative | 26 (26·8) |
| Missing | 13 |
| BRAF genotype | |
| BRAF V600E | 4 (4·8) |
| Mutation‐negative | 80 (95·2) |
| Missing | 26 |
| MC1R genotype | |
| At least one MC1R variant | 39 (61·9) |
| No MC1R variants | 24 (38·1) |
| Missing | 47 |
| Neurological and/or developmental problems | |
| Yes | 22 (21·4) |
| No | 81 (78·6) |
| Missing | 7 |
| Magnetic resonance imaging | |
| Normal | 56 (73·7) |
| Abnormal | 20 (26·3) |
| Missing | 34 |
Table 2.
Statistics relating to age corresponding to each photo set
| Age at first photo (years) (n = 102) | Age at second photo (years) (n = 73) | Age at third photo (years) (n = 44) | Age at fourth photo (years) (n = 25) | Age at fifth photo (years) (n = 11) | Age at sixth photo (years) (n = 3) | Age at seventh photo (years) (n = 3) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 3·2 | 4·8 | 6·2 | 6·8 | 8·3 | 6·3 | 9·1 |
| Median | 1·3 | 3·3 | 4·9 | 5·8 | 8·1 | 6·7 | 9·5 |
| Minimum | 0·0 | 0·2 | 0·4 | 1·1 | 3·5 | 4·9 | 7·8 |
| Maximum | 16·0 | 14·3 | 17·4 | 15·0 | 16·5 | 7·1 | 10·1 |
Multiple regression analysis modelling final measurement of CMN L* (lucency, lightness) identified a significant positive association with the final measurement of normal skin L* (P < 0·001) (Fig. 2a). Modelling of total change in CMN L* over time – in effect total lightening over time – was also significantly and positively associated with the final measurement of normal skin L* (P < 0·001) (Fig. 2b). The genetic correlate of these two key findings comes from modelling final CMN L* and total change in CMN L* over time against MC1R genotype, where both variables were found to be strongly significantly associated with the presence of at least one germline MC1R variant allele (P < 0·001). However, when MC1R variant status was modelled in association with self‐declared ethnicity, ethnicity was the more powerful predictor and MC1R ceased to be significant; those identifying as white had a significantly lighter final CMN colour (P < 0·001). The degree of lightening between successive sets of photographs showed a decreasing trend (Fig. 3), implying that the degree of spontaneous lightening decreases with age, although still measurable at photo set 5, at which the mean and median age was 8 years.
Figure 2.
Final congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) colour and total change in CMN colour are related to normal skin colour, not to colour at birth. (a) Final CMN L* (lucency, lightness) is significantly associated with normal skin L* (P < 0·001); (b) total change in CMN L* (or total lightening) of CMN over time is significantly associated with final normal skin L* (P < 0·001); (c) no association was demonstrated between CMN L* in the first 3 months of life and final CMN L*.
Figure 3.
The degree of spontaneous lightening decreases gradually with age. Differences in congenital melanocytic naevi L* (lucency, lightness) shows a decreasing trend with increasing photograph set, which is related to increasing mean age. Photograph sets 6 and 7 had too few data points to be included in this analysis. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals (CI). Ages corresponding to photo sets are given in Table 2.
No significant association was observed between CMN final L* and the immediate postnatal L* (P = 0·064, Bonferroni‐corrected significance level P < 0·007) (Fig. 2c). Similarly, NRAS genotype and projected adult size of CMN were not found to be associated with CMN final L* or total change in L*. Although age was found to be associated with final CMN L*, this statistical association was negated when combined with normal skin L*. Patient sex was not found to be associated with final L*.
Strikingly, comparison of final colour measurement values from treated and untreated areas of CMN in the same patient, where certain areas had been left untreated for reasons such as site (e.g. the buttocks; Fig. 4a), demonstrated no measurable difference. This finding was observed in a variety of treatment modalities, including dermabrasion, curettage and ablative laser (Fig. 4). When analysis of colour change over time was done, the untreated area had lightened spontaneously, and the treated area had repigmented, both to the same final colour (Fig. 4).
Figure 4.
Final congenital melanocytic naevus (CMN) colour is entirely unaffected by superficial removal techniques. Patients immediately postintervention compared with final CMN colour, following intervention with curettage at (a) 9 months and (b) 7 years, and ablative laser at (c) 8 years and (d) 13 years. In (a) and (b) red arrows areas indicate the junction of treated and untreated CMN, and in (c) and (d) blue arrows indicate untreated areas, indicating that the final colour of treated and untreated naevi is the same. Note the scarring from the curettage in (a).
Discussion
Spontaneous lightening in CMN is a recognized phenomenon but has not previously been studied systematically; as such, clinicians were unable to speculate on the chances of lightening on an individual basis when meeting a child at birth. Decisions on excision or superficial removal techniques are frequently based on the colour of the naevus at, or soon after, birth, and results of superficial removal are often compared with photos from that time, which does not account for any effects of spontaneous lightening. Accurate and objective data on the natural history of colour change in CMN are therefore much needed in the management of patients with CMN.
We find here that final colour of CMN in childhood is genetically determined, related to the background normal skin colour of the individual, and to MC1R genotype, which has a strong genetic influence on the lightness of skin colour. This makes a degree of intuitive sense – melanin within naevus cells is assembled from the same mix of melanin monomers as in the rest of the body, albeit in an area of high concentration of naevus cells, and this mix of melanin monomers is known to be genetically determined. This simple rule was beautifully demonstrated in patients in whom hair colour changed markedly over the time of the study, and where the CMN colour could be seen to adopt the same pigmentary characteristics as those of the mid‐brown, then blonde, then red hair in the same individual (Fig. 5). In addition, CMN final colour was unrelated to colour in the first 3 months of life, mirroring what we know of the lack of connection between hair, eye and skin colour at birth, and eventual pigmentary phenotype in childhood. The colour of CMN in the first 3 months of life should therefore not be used as a predictor of final colour, and should not be used as a comparator with which to judge the outcomes of superficial removal at a later date. Instead, parents can be advised that the colour will gradually settle over the first few years, and that more lightening will be expected in lighter‐skinned individuals than in darker‐skinned individuals.
Figure 5.
Final congenital melanocytic naevus (CMN) colour is strongly associated with background pigmentary phenotype. A female patient with a bathing trunk CMN at (a) birth, (b) 3 years and (c) 11 years, and a male infant with a frontal scalp CMN at (d) birth, (e) 2 months and (f) 1 year, and later at (g–i) 10 years, demonstrating that the change in CMN colour was strongly correlated to the child's pigmentary phenotype, which is most noticeable in the hair colour.
A recent systematic review of laser treatment in CMN concluded that there were good results for reduction of pigmentation in the short term.1 However, these results were assessed by eye rather than measurement, by nonblinded physicians, and follow‐up was short, ranging from immediately postprocedure to 2·5 years. Interestingly, despite the positive conclusions, the stated repigmentation rate was 54%.1 Furthermore, medical complication rates were high, with reported scarring in up to 25%, and wound infection in up to 18%.1 Several small studies have reported dramatic improvements and high levels of patient satisfaction after superficial removal techniques; however, improvements in colour were judged subjectively and immediately postintervention.5, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 Furthermore, several reports and studies still advocate early aggressive intervention in CMN with superficial removal techniques with outcomes reported by direct comparison of results to early postnatal pictures.3, 5, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 The striking images here of children in which untreated and treated areas of CMN end up at exactly the same final colour, should bring a halt to superficial removal of CMN as a method for lightening colour.
Interestingly, the phenomenon we describe here may have been the origin of the long‐held theory that early superficial removal was more effective than the same intervention at a later age. If final colour was always compared with birth colour by the physicians and surgeons undertaking these procedures, there would, indeed, have appeared to be more lightening in those who had earlier intervention, particularly in white populations where a large degree of lightening can occur after birth.
In conclusion, final CMN colour in childhood is genetically determined, related to normal skin colour and inherited pigmentary phenotype. In addition, final CMN colour is not related to colour in the first 3 months of life, a time during which hair and eye colour are also under different influences, such as maternal hormones. Therefore, decisions on intervention should not be based upon colour at birth. Children with lighter skin tone will have more lightening of the CMN after birth than those with darker skin tone. Importantly, as final colour is genetically determined it is not affected by superficial removal techniques, after which repigmentation occurs to produce the same colour as the naevus would have naturally taken on over time.
Funding sources S.P. was funded by Newlife award number 15‐16/10, and by Caring Matters Now Charity, and V.A.K. is funded by the Wellcome Trust, award number WT104076MA. The work was supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research through Biomedical Research Centres at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust and University College London.
Conflict of interest None declared.
References
- 1. Eggen CAM, Lommerts JE, van Zuuren EJ et al Laser treatment of congenital melanocytic naevi: a systematic review. Br J Dermatol 2018; 178:369–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Bray FN, Shah V, Nouri K. Laser treatment of congenital melanocytic naevi: a review of the literature. Lasers Med Sci 2016; 31:197–204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. De Raeve LE, Roseeuw DI. Curettage of giant congenital melanocytic naevi in neonates: a decade later. Arch Dermatol 2002; 138:943–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Moss AL. Congenital “giant” naevus: a preliminary report of a new surgical approach. Br J Plastic Surg 1987; 40:410–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Casanova D, Bardot J, Andrac‐Meyer L, Magalon G. Early curettage of giant congenital naevi in children. Br J Dermtol 1998; 138:341–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Coyette M, Elajmi A, Bayet B, Lengele B. Hydrosurgery, a new therapeutic perspective in early care of giant congenital naevi: a preliminary series of four cases. J Plastic Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2014; 67:1063–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Kinsler VA, Birley J, Atherton DJ. Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children Registry for Congenital Melanocytic Naevi: prospective study 1988–2007. Part 2 – Evaluation of treatments. Br J Dermatol 2009; 160:387–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Dawson HA, Atherton DJ, Mayou B. A prospective study of congenital melanocytic naevi: progress report and evaluation after 6 years. Br J Dermatol 1996; 134:617–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Martin JM, Jorda E, Calduch L et al Progressive depigmentation of a palmar congenital melanocytic nevus without an associated halo phenomenon. Dermatology 2006; 212:198–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Martin JM, Jorda E, Monteagudo C et al Desmoplastic giant congenital nevus with progressive depigmentation. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007; 56:S10–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Strauss RM, Newton Bishop JA. Spontaneous involution of congenital melanocytic naevi of the scalp. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008; 58:508–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Bourgeois‐Droin C, Granier F, Grossin M. [Regression of a congenital giant pigmented nevus of the scalp associated with congenital halo‐naevi]. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1989; 116:866–8 (in French). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Cusack C, Warde D, Lynch W et al Dramatic spontaneous regression of a medium‐sized congenital melanocytic naevus. Clin Exp Dermatol 2009; 34:e34–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Gass JK, Grant JW, Hall PN et al Clinical resolution of a neonatally eroded giant congenital melanocytic nevus. Pediatr Dermatol 2006; 23:567–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Hogan DJ, Murphy F, Bremner RM. Spontaneous resolution of a giant congenital melanocytic nevus. Pediatr Dermatol 1988; 5:170–2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Kageshita T, Inoue Y, Ono T. Spontaneous regression of congenital melanocytic naevi without evidence of the halo phenomenon. Dermatology 2003; 207:193–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Lee NR, Chung HC, Hong H et al Spontaneous involution of congenital melanocytic nevus with halo phenomenon. Am J Dermatopathol 2015; 37:e137–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Nath AK, Thappa DM, Rajesh NG. Spontaneous regression of a congenital melanocytic nevus. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2011; 77:507–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Patsatsi A, Kokolios M, Pikou O et al Sclerotic regressing large congenital nevus. Pediatr Dermatol 2016; 33:e366–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Ridley CM. Giant halo naevus with spontaneous resolution. Trans St Johns Hosp Dermatol Soc 1974; 60:54–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Sathyanarayana BD, Basavaraj HB, Nischal KC et al Insight into evolution of a giant congenital nevomelanocytic nevus over 14 years. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2014; 80:243–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Kinsler V, Bulstrode N. The role of surgery in the management of congenital melanocytic naevi in children: a perspective from Great Ormond Street Hospital. J Plastic Reconstruct Aesthet Surg 2009; 62:595–601. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Rah DK, Kim SC, Lee KH et al Objective evaluation of treatment effects on port‐wine stains using L*a*b* colour coordinates. Plastic Reconstruct Surg 2001; 108:842–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Cheon YW, Lee WJ, Rah DK. Objective and quantitative evaluation of scar colour using the L*a*b* colour coordinates. J Craniofac Surg 2010; 21:679–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Sommers M, Beacham B, Baker R, Fargo J. Intra‐ and inter‐rater reliability of digital image analysis for skin colour measurement. Skin Res Technol 2013; 19:484–91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Takatsui F, Andrade MF, Neisser MP et al CIE L*a*b*: comparison of digital images obtained photographically by manual and automatic modes. Braz Oral Res 2012; 26:578–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Krengel S, Scope A, Dusza SW et al New recommendations for the categorization of cutaneous features of congenital melanocytic naevi. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013; 68:441–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Kinsler VA, Birley J, Atherton DJ. Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children Registry for congenital melanocytic naevi: prospective study 1988–2007. Part 1 – epidemiology, phenotype and outcomes. Br J Dermatol 2009; 160:143–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Kinsler VA, O'Hare P, Bulstrode N et al Melanoma in congenital melanocytic naevi. Br J Dermatol 2017; 176:1131–43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Waelchli R, Aylett SE, Atherton D et al Classification of neurological abnormalities in children with congenital melanocytic naevus syndrome identifies MRI as the best predictor of clinical outcome. Br J Dermatol 2015; 173:739–50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Waelchli R, Williams J, Cole T et al Growth and hormone profiling in children with congenital melanocytic naevi. Br J Dermatol 2015; 173:1471–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Kinsler VA, Thomas AC, Ishida M et al Multiple congenital melanocytic naevi and neurocutaneous melanosis are caused by postzygotic mutations in codon 61 of NRAS. J Invest Dermatol 2013; 133:2229–36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Polubothu S, McGuire N, Al‐Olabi L et al Does the gene matter? Genotype–phenotype and genotype‐outcome associations in congenital melanocytic naevi. Br J Dermatol 2019; DOI: 10.1111/bjd.18106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Kinsler VA, Abu‐Amero S, Budd P et al Germline melanocortin‐1‐receptor genotype is associated with severity of cutaneous phenotype in congenital melanocytic naevi: a role for MC1R in human fetal development. J Invest Dermatol 2012; 132:2026–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Funayama E, Sasaki S, Furukawa H et al Effectiveness of combined pulsed dye and Q‐switched ruby laser treatment for large to giant congenital melanocytic naevi. Br J Dermatol 2012; 167:1085–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Kim YJ, Whang KU, Choi WB et al Efficacy and safety of 1,064 nm Q‐switched Nd:YAG laser treatment for removing melanocytic naevi. Ann Dermatol 2012; 24:162–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Lim JY, Jeong Y, Whang KK. A combination of dual‐mode 2,940 nm Er:YAG laser ablation with surgical excision for treating medium‐sized congenital melanocytic nevus. Ann Dermatol 2009; 21:120–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Chait LA, White B, Skudowitz RB. The treatment of giant hairy naevi by dermabrasion in the first few weeks of life. Case reports. S Afr Med J 1981; 60:593–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Rompel R, Moser M, Petres J. Dermabrasion of congenital nevocellular naevi: experience in 215 patients. Dermatology 1997; 194:261–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Bohn J, Svensson H, Aberg M. Dermabrasion of large congenital melanocytic naevi in neonates. Scand J Plast Reconstruct Surg Hand Surg 2000; 34:321–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Miller CJ, Becker DW Jr. Removing pigmentation by dermabrading naevi in infancy. Br J Plast Surg 1979; 32:124–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Natarajan K, Arunachalam P, Sundar D, Srinivas CR. Congenital melanocytic naevi: catch them early! J Cutan Aesthet Surg 2013; 6:38–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]