ReviewOral and maxillofacial surgery2019
Merkel cell carcinoma of the forehead area: a literature review and case report.
Review in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapidly Progressive Merkel Cell Carcinoma with Atypical Metastatic Pattern-A Case Report and Brief Literature Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- The Possibility of Using Genotoxicity, Oxidative Stress and Inflammation Blood Biomarkers to Predict the Occurrence of Late Cutaneous Side Effects after Radiotherapy.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMerkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an uncommon, aggressive malignancy of the skin, mostly affecting head and neck area in elderly white patients. Between head/neck sites, face accounts for 61% and forehead accounts for 17% of all face MCCs. PURPOSE: We here present a literature review MCC cases arising in the forehead area, published in the English literature in the period 1987-2018, and report a personal observation with a late diagnosis and a treatment out of the current recommendations. The aims of this paper are to provide an up-to-date on MCC arising in the forehead area and to raise awareness about misdiagnosis of this type of lesion mimicking arteriovenous malformations (AVM). MATERIAL AND
methodLiterature review was performed on PubMed and Medline database and "Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC)," "forehead" and "MCC forehead location" were the terms the authors searched for. Patients' data have been drawn from descriptions of single cases and of short case series reports. For each case, data were collected about clinical characteristics, treatment modalities and outcomes. The study has been limited to the clinical features of the disease, excluding etiologic/pathogenic aspects.
resultsTwenty-five patients with forehead MCC have been identified, coming from 20 sources. Nineteen presented a locoregional disease and 6 had an advanced pathology. TNM classification was reported in only two cases lacking for the other available data. Patients presented at mean age of 66 years with solitary or multiple nodules or dome-shaped/hemispherical mass, rarely ulcerated. Mean size of tumors was 1.13 cm of max diameter. Previous or concurrent malignancies or immune-hematologic disorders (AIDS) were often associated. At first investigation, lesion was often mistaken for other malignant or benign processes and, then, diagnosis was generally late. Some type of preoperative biopsy was performed in 3 patients, while the others had only a postoperative microscopic study of specimen. Initial treatment consisted in 6 cases (24%) in a not further specified about extent and width of margins local excision of the primary lesion, while a wide resection was reported in only 3 cases (12%). Surgical treatment of involved lymph-nodes was performed in 3 cases (12%). Six patients underwent radiotherapy for locoregional or distant recurrences. Mortality and overall survival rate at five years were 28% and 24%, respectively. Spontaneous regression was observed in 3 patients (12%). CASE REPORT: Personal observation concerned an 82-year-old woman presenting with a forehead periorbital 5 × 5 cm red-bluish mass. The erythematous lesion was erroneously diagnosed as hemangioma on the base of color, the absence of any signs of malignancy, an angio CT indicating a hypervascular tissue and a FNA cytology (FNAC) lacking of malignant cells. The mass was excised as a benign lesion with about 1 cm margins extent without searching larger edges. Postoperative radiotherapy was offered to the patient after histology report, but she refused. After 4 months from surgery, she had a parotid metastasis and died from the illness in spite of platinum-based chemotherapy.
conclusionsThis study confirms the aggressiveness of forehead MCC, comparable with that of other face similar tumors. Personal case suggests that the deceitful benign feature of lesion may mimic an AVM and that FNAC may be misleading and diagnostic failure worsen prognosis. Our experience suggests that in the face smaller than 2-3 cm margins resection may increase the risk of locoregional recurrence. Therefore, postoperative wide-field irradiation should be ever delivered, after forehead MCC surgery, not only when clear margins are unattainable or involved with tumor, but also when negative microscopic edges are documented and residual cancer is thought not persist in the tumor bed. Orbit irradiation seems to be not dangerous for the eye.
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.