ArticleAnais brasileiros de dermatologia
Eccrine poroma versus eccrine porocarcinoma: a comparative study of clinicopathological features.
Article in Anais brasileiros de dermatologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEccrine porocarcinoma (EPC) is a rare cutaneous neoplasm, commonly arising from its benign counterpart, eccrine poroma (EP), but potential unrevealed clinicopathological differences between them are not well understood.
objectivesThis study aimed to identify clinicopathological features of EP and EPC and describe the factors that may be associated with the malignant transformation of EP by comparing the two groups.
methodsA total of 37 cases of EP and 22 cases of EPC diagnosed between January 2017 and June 2023 were retrospectively reviewed, and the clinical and histopathological characteristics were compared using statistical methods.
resultsClinical and histopathologic data such as age, gender, site, clinical presentation, and histopathologic characteristics were collected. The EPC group was more common in older patients, with more cases located in exposed areas, and the patients with EPC had larger lesions with a higher incidence of ulceration. Histopathological features showed significant differences in tumor architecture, ulceration, squamous differentiation, spindle cell changes, central necrosis, and diffuse inflammatory infiltration between the two groups. STUDY LIMITATIONS: This study has limitations due to a small number of cases with potential experimental bias.
conclusionThe clinicopathological features of EP and EPC were compared in this study and the results may assist clinicians in diagnosis and management of these tumors by helping to identify potential factors associated with the malignant transformation of EP.
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.