Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38751175›Full record

ArticleActa dermato-venereologica2024

Clinical versus Histological Assessment of Basal Cell Carcinoma Subtype and Thickness of Tumours Selected for Photodynamic Therapy.

Erik Mørk, Patricia Mjønes, Olav A Foss, Cato Mørk, Ingeborg M Bachmann, Susanne Kroon, Lars K Dotterud, Per Helsing, Øystein Vatne, Eidi Christensen

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Acta dermato-venereologica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

10 authors.

Erik MørkDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway. erik.mork@ntnu.no.
Patricia MjønesDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Department of Pathology, St. Olav's Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Olav A FossDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Clinic of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Dermatology, St. Olav's Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Cato MørkAkershus Dermatology Centre, Lørenskog, Norway.
Ingeborg M BachmannInstitute of Medical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; Department of Dermatology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Susanne KroonDepartment of Dermatology and Venerology, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway.
Lars K DotterudLillehammer Dermatology Centre, Lillehammer, Norway.
Per HelsingDepartment of Dermatology, Oslo University Hospital Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Øystein VatneDepartment of Dermatology, Førde Central Hospital, Førde, Norway.
Eidi ChristensenDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Department of Dermatology, St. Olav's Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Photodynamic therapy is an approved treatment for primary, superficial, and small nodular basal cell carcinomas with a thickness of < 2 mm located on low-risk sites. Histologically verified basal cell carcinomas clinically assessed as suited for photodynamic therapy were included. The study aimed to investigate the agreement between clinical and histological assessments of basal cell carcinoma subtypes and thickness of tumours selected for photodynamic therapy with histopathological evaluation as a reference. A total of 343 tumours were included. The agreement between clinical and histological diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma subtype was 72% (p < 0.001). Clinical assessment of subtype had a sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 55% for superficial tumours and a sensitivity of 55% and specificity of 85% for nodular tumours. The mean ± SD thickness values by clinical and histological assessments were 0.95 ± 0.53 and 0.86 ± 0.75. The difference of 0.09 mm was statistically significant (p = 0.017), but not considered to be clinically relevant, although the differences between specific subgroups could be relevant. Among basal cell carcinomas clinically diagnosed as superficial, 91% were histologically consistent with the current photodynamic therapy criteria. The main results suggest that histopathological evaluation should precede photodynamic therapy to ensure selection of suitable basal cell carcinomas. In selected cases, the clinical diagnosis alone may be adequate before proceeding with photodynamic therapy.

Indexed as

Basal Cell CarcinomaPhotochemotherapySkin NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiopsyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionPhotosensitizing AgentsPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesPhotosensitizing Agents

Identifiers

PMID38751175
PMCPMC11110808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.