ArticleDermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.]2012
Fee comparisons of treatments for nonmelanoma skin cancer in a private practice academic setting.
Article in Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.], 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- The State of Mohs Micrographic Surgery in 2025-2026: Current Challenges, Pressures, and the Path Forward.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2026Review
- Cost and cost-effectiveness of Mohs micrographic surgery versus conventional excision for nonmelanoma skin cancer: A scoping review.JAAD international · 2026Review
- Opportunities to Avoid Invasive Cancer by Diagnosis and Interception of Preneoplastic Lesions and Cancer Risk Conditions.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of margin-controlled surgery for vulvar Paget's disease.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2024Article
- Same Day Biopsy and Treatment of Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer in Patients with Field Cancerization: A Retrospective Chart Study.Journal of skin cancer · 2023Article
- Total Margin-Controlled Excision is Superior to Standard Excision for Keratinocyte Carcinoma on the Nose: A Veterans Affairs Nested Cohort Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Patient-reported health not associated with keratinocyte carcinoma treatment choice in a Medicare cohort of older adults.The British journal of dermatology · 2020Article
- Mohs Micrographic Surgery: Development, Technique, and Applications in Cutaneous Malignancies.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2018Review
- Skin Cancer in U.S. Elderly Adults: Does Life Expectancy Play a Role in Treatment Decisions?Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2016Article
- Targeted Therapies Compared to Dacarbazine for Treatment of BRAF(V600E) Metastatic Melanoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Journal of skin cancer · 2015Article
- Properly selected skin cancer treatments are very effective.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2014Article
- Response to Rogers et al.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2014Article
- Response to Rogers et al.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2014Article
- Extramammary paget disease: minimal surgical therapy.Annals of dermatology · 2013Article
- Tumor recurrence 5 years after treatment of cutaneous basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2013Article
- Needs assessment for Mohs micrographic surgery.Dermatologic clinics · 2012Review
- Aging and the treatment of basal cell carcinoma.Clinics in dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare fees for biopsy, treatment procedure, repair, and 2-month follow-up for nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) treatments: electrodesiccation and curettage (ED&C), excision, and Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS).
methodsA cost comparison of 936 primary NMSCs diagnosed in 1999/2000 at a University affiliated dermatology practice. Clinical data was from medical record review. 2007 Medicare Fee Schedule costs determined fees for surgical care. Pearson chi-square tests, t-tests and analysis of variance compared fee differences. Linear regression determined independent effects of tumor and treatment characteristics on fees.
resultsMean fees/lesion were $463 for ED&C, $1,222 for excision, and $2,085 for MMS (p < .001). For all treatments, primary procedure costs were highest (38%, 45%, and 41%). Total repair fees were higher with MMS ($735) vs excisions ($197). Fees were higher for head and neck tumors (p < .001), H-zone tumors (p < .001), and tumors smaller than 10 mm in diameter (p = .04). Regression models predicted that the treatment fees would be $2,109 for MMS and $1,252 for excision (p < .001). Tumor size greater than 10 mm in diameter (added $128), tumors on the head and neck (added $966), and MMS (added $857 vs excision) were independently related to higher fees (p < .001).
conclusionEven after adjusting for risk factors, MMS has higher fees than excision for primary NMSC. Repairs accounted for the majority of this difference. These fee comparisons provide a basis for comparative effectiveness studies of treatments for this common cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.