Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37927296›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of dermatology2024

'Pitfalls for differentiating basal cell carcinoma from non-basal cell carcinoma on optical coherence tomography: A clinical series'.

Tom Wolswijk, Patty J Nelemans, Fieke Adan, Myrurgia Abdul Hamid, Klara Mosterd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of dermatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Tom WolswijkDepartment of Dermatology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0253-8969
Patty J NelemansDepartment of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Fieke AdanDepartment of Dermatology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Myrurgia Abdul HamidDepartment of Pathology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Klara MosterdDepartment of Dermatology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optical coherence tomography (OCT), a non-invasive diagnostic modality, may replace biopsy for diagnosing basal cell carcinoma (BCC) if a high-confidence BCC diagnosis can be established. In other cases, biopsy remains necessary to establish a histopathological diagnosis and treatment regimen. It is, therefore, essential that OCT assessors have a high specificity for differentiating BCC from non-BCC lesions. To establish high-confidence BCC diagnoses, specific morphological BCC characteristics on OCT are used. This study aimed to review several cases of non-BCC lesions that were misclassified as BCC by experienced OCT assessors, thereby providing insight into the causes of these misclassifications and how they may be prevented. The study population consisted of patients who had a histopathologically-verified non-BCC lesion. Patients from Maastricht University Medical Center+ from February 2021 to April 2021 were included in the study. Two independent OCT assessors assessed OCT scans. One OCT assessor recorded the presence or absence of validated morphological BCC characteristics. A false-positive OCT test result was defined as certainty of BCC presence in a non-BCC lesion. The frequency of misclassifications and the presence or absence of morphological BCC features are discussed. A total of 124 patients with non-BCC lesions were included. Six patients were misclassified by both OCT assessors and are discussed in more detail. Histopathological diagnoses were squamous cell carcinoma (n = 2/21), actinic keratosis (n = 2/29), squamous cell carcinoma in situ/Bowen's disease (n = 1/16), or interphase dermatitis (n = 1/4). In all misclassified cases, multiple, apparent morphological BCC characteristics on OCT were present. Most non-BCC lesions are recognized as such by OCT assessors. However, there remains a small risk that a high-confidence BCC diagnosis is established in non-BCC lesions wherein features mimicking validated BCC characteristics are present. Misclassification may be prevented by careful delineation of epidermal layers and good differentiation between dermal ovoid structures typical of BCC versus squamous cell carcinoma.

Indexed as

Basal Cell CarcinomaCarcinoma, Squamous CellSkin NeoplasmsHumansSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Optical Coherencebasal cell carcinomaimagingoptical coherence tomography

Identifiers

PMID37927296
PMCPMC11483917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.