ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Mohs Appropriate Use Criteria (MAUC) have come into question recently regarding the most appropriate treatment for superficial basal cell carcinoma (sBCC). At the heart of this debate is the limited body of evidence describing tumor behavior of sBCC based on clinical factors relevant to the MAUC. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether sBCC is more likely to harbor aggressive subtypes in high-risk anatomical locations and in immunocompromised patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single institution retrospective review produced 133 evaluable Mohs cases performed on sBCC over a 10-year period. All slides from the respective cases were reviewed for the presence of histologic patterns other than known sBCC. Cases were then grouped by both MAUC anatomical zone (H, M, and L) and patient immune status for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A significantly higher rate of mixed histology (MH) was observed when comparing Zone H with Zone L across all patients, healthy patients, and immunocompromised patients. The same was true when comparing Zone M with Zone L for all patients and healthy patients (immunocompromised did not reach significance). CONCLUSION: The authors' data very clearly demonstrate a higher rate of MH in sBCC of the head and neck which provides strong support to the current MAUC scoring.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Basal Cell/diagnosis , Mohs Surgery/standards , Skin Neoplasms/diagnosis , Skin/pathology , Adult , Aged , Biopsy , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/immunology , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/surgery , Clinical Decision-Making , Female , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Selection , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Skin Neoplasms/immunology , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Skin Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
Advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) accounts for only 5% of all cases of cSCC but up to 60% of disease related deaths. Historically, this disease has lacked effective treatment options due to a combination of poor response rate, poor response durability and significant treatment-associated morbidity. Autumn of 2018 marked the first time ever that an agent received US FDA approval for advanced cSCC and the future is looking much brighter for this previously neglected patient population. The purpose of this article is to review the various systemic treatment options for advanced cSCC moving from the past to the present, highlighting their relative merits and shortcomings, and to briefly speculate on future developments in the field of advanced cSCC.