ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Melanotrichoblastoma misdiagnosed as basal cell carcinoma: a case report.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Melanotrichoblastoma (MTB) is an exceptionally rare benign adnexal tumor with follicular differentiation. Its clinical and dermoscopic resemblance to pigmented basal cell carcinoma (BCC) often leads to misdiagnosis. Case presentation: A 51-year-old male presented with a slow-growing, blue-black nodule on the right canthus that had been present for five decades, with recent central ulceration. Dermoscopy revealed homogeneous pigmentation with atypical blue-white areas and dilated vessels, suggestive of BCC. Histopathological examination showed well-demarcated dermal nests of basaloid cells with peripheral palisading and stromal pigment deposition. Importantly, retraction clefts were absent, a key feature distinguishing MTB from BCC. The lesion was completely excised, with no recurrence after two years. Conclusion: This case highlights the diagnostic challenge of MTB. Histopathology remains the gold standard for differentiation, wherein the absence of retraction clefts serves as a pivotal diagnostic clue. Increased awareness of MTB is essential to avoid misdiagnosis and ensure appropriate, conservative management.
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.