Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2023
Dermatopathologic features of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and actinic keratosis: Consensus criteria and proposed reporting guidelines.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Christensen Rachel E, Elston Dirk M, Worley Brandon, Dirr McKenzie A, Anvery Noor, Kang Bianca Y, Bahrami Soon, Brodell Robert T, Cerroni Lorenzo, Elston Carly, Ferringer Tammie, Hurley M Yadira, Garton Kyle, Lee Joyce Siong See, Liu Yeqiang, Maize John C, McNiff Jennifer M, Rapini Ronald P, Sangueza Omar P, Shea Christopher R, Zhou Cheng, Alam Murad
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is considerable variation in the literature regarding the dermatopathologic diagnostic features of and reporting guidelines for actinic keratosis (AK) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC).
OBJECTIVE: To develop consensus recommendations regarding diagnostic criteria, nomenclature, and reporting of AK and cSCC.
METHODS: Literature review and cross-sectional multiround Delphi process including an international group of expert dermatopathologists followed by a consensus meeting.
RESULTS: Consensus was achieved regarding the key dermatopathologic features necessary for diagnosing cSCC, AK, and associated variants; grading of degree of cellular differentiation in cSCC; utility of immunohistochemistry for diagnosis of cSCC; and pathologic features that should be reported for cSCC and AK.
LIMITATIONS: Consensus was not achieved on all questions considered.
CONCLUSION: Despite the lack of clarity in the literature, there is consensus among expert dermatopathologists regarding diagnostic criteria and appropriate reporting of AK and cSCC. Widespread implementation of these consensus recommendations may improve communication between dermatopathologists and clinicians, facilitating appropriate treatment of AK and cSCC.
OBJECTIVE: To develop consensus recommendations regarding diagnostic criteria, nomenclature, and reporting of AK and cSCC.
METHODS: Literature review and cross-sectional multiround Delphi process including an international group of expert dermatopathologists followed by a consensus meeting.
RESULTS: Consensus was achieved regarding the key dermatopathologic features necessary for diagnosing cSCC, AK, and associated variants; grading of degree of cellular differentiation in cSCC; utility of immunohistochemistry for diagnosis of cSCC; and pathologic features that should be reported for cSCC and AK.
LIMITATIONS: Consensus was not achieved on all questions considered.
CONCLUSION: Despite the lack of clarity in the literature, there is consensus among expert dermatopathologists regarding diagnostic criteria and appropriate reporting of AK and cSCC. Widespread implementation of these consensus recommendations may improve communication between dermatopathologists and clinicians, facilitating appropriate treatment of AK and cSCC.