4.1 Article

Epidemiology of basal cell carcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas in a Department of Dermatology - a 5 year review

期刊

ANAIS BRASILEIROS DE DERMATOLOGIA
卷 87, 期 2, 页码 212-219

出版社

SOC BRASILEIRA DERMATOLOGIA
DOI: 10.1590/S0365-05962012000200004

关键词

Carcinoma; basal cell; Carcinoma; squamous cell; Neoplasms; Skin neoplasms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Non-melanoma skin cancer, a common designation for both basal cell carcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas, is the most frequent malignant skin neoplasm. OBJECTIVE: Epidemiologic characterization of the population with Non-melanoma skin cancer. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with Non-melanoma skin cancer based on histopathologic analysis of all incisional or excisional skin biopsies performed between 2004 and 2008 in a Department of Dermatology. RESULTS: A total of 3075 Non-melanoma skin cancers were identified, representing 88% of all malignant skin neoplasms (n=3493) diagnosed in the same period. Of those, 68,3% were basal cell carcinomas. Most Non-melanoma skin cancer patients were female and over 60 years old. Of all Non-melanoma skin cancer, 81,7% (n=1443) were located in sun-exposed skin, and represented 95,1% of malignant skin neoplasms in sun-exposed skin. Non-melanoma skin cancer was the most frequent malignant skin neoplasm in most topographic locations, except for abdomen and pelvis - over 95% of all malignant skin neoplasms in the face, neck and scalp were Non-melanoma skin cancer. Basal cell carcinomas were clearly predominant in all locations, except in upper and lower limbs, lower lip and genitals, where squamous cell carcinomas represented respectively 77,7%, 77,4%, 94,7% and 95,3% of the Non-melanoma skin cancers. CONCLUSION: Being the most common skin cancer, Non-melanoma skin cancer should be under constant surveillance, in order to monitor its epidemiologic dynamics, the efficiency of preventive measures and the adaptation of the healthcare resources.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据