←back to thread

422 points sungam | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.587s | source

Coded using Gemini Pro 2.5 (free version) in about 2-3 hours.

Single file including all html/js/css, Vanilla JS, no backend, scores persisted with localStorage.

Deployed using ubuntu/apache2/python/flask on a £5 Digital Ocean server (but could have been hosted on a static hosting provider as it's just a single page with no backend).

Images / metadata stored in an AWS S3 bucket.

Show context
meindnoch ◴[] No.45159730[source]
Is this really "invasive melanoma"? https://drmagnuslynch.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/isic-images...
replies(3): >>45159762 #>>45159817 #>>45159926 #
sungam ◴[] No.45159926[source]
According to the metadata supplied with the dataset yes

Could definitely be a misclassification, however a small proportion of moles that look entirely harmless to the naked eye and under the dermatoscope (skin microscope) can be cancerous.

For example, have a look at these images of naevoid melanoma: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=naevoid+melanoma

This is why dermatology can be challenging and why AI-based image classification is difficult from a liability/risk perspective

I was previously clinical lead for a melanoma multidisciplinary meeting and 1-2 times per year I would see a patient with a melanoma that presented like this and looking back at previous photos there was no features that would have worried me.

The key thing that I emphasise to patients is that even if a mole looks harmless it is important to monitor for any signs of change since a skin cancer will almost always change in appearance over a period of several months

replies(2): >>45160345 #>>45161856 #
1. 48terry ◴[] No.45161856[source]
> According to the metadata supplied with the dataset yes

"idk but that's what it says" somehow this does not inspire confidence in the skin cancer learning app.

replies(1): >>45162177 #