Assessing the Concordance of Clinical and Pathological Diagnoses in Basal Cell Carcinoma Among the Iranian Population: A Cross‐Sectional Analysis of 229 Cases

• Published in: Cancer reports 2024-10, Vol.7 (10), p.e70040-n/a
• Main Authors: Farshad, Fatemeh, Behrangi, Elham, Jafarzadeh, Alireza, Roohaninasab, Masoumeh, Shayanfar, Nasrin, Aryanian, Zeinab, Hatami, Parvaneh, Goodarzi, Azadeh
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Carcinoma, Basal Cell - diagnosis; Carcinoma, Basal Cell - epidemiology; Carcinoma, Basal Cell - pathology; clinical assessment; Cross-Sectional Studies; diagnostic accuracy; Female; histopathological findings; Humans; Iran - epidemiology; Male; Middle Aged; Original; referral patterns; Retrospective Studies; skin cancer education; Skin Neoplasms - diagnosis; Skin Neoplasms - epidemiology; Skin Neoplasms - pathology
• ISSN: 2573-8348; 2573-8348
• DOI: 10.1002/cnr2.70040

ABSTRACT Background Nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) is the most prevalent malignancy globally, with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) being the most common type. Aims This study aims to evaluate the concordance between clinical and pathological diagnoses of BCC, emphasizing the importance of early detection. Methods and Results In this cross‐sectional study, we conducted a retrospective review of clinical and pathological records for 229 patients diagnosed with BCC between 2020 and 2024. The analysis focused on gender, age, lesion location, and diagnostic accuracy. Among the 229 patients, 193 were men (84.3%), and 131 (57.2%) had recorded clinical diagnoses. The mean age of diagnosed patients was 67.72 years. Lesions were primarily located on the scalp (29.5%), face (26.4%), and nose (13.9%). Of the pathological evaluations, 184 cases (80.3%) confirmed BCC, while 45 cases had alternative diagnoses. Notably, 94.6% of clinically diagnosed patients were suspected to have BCC by their physicians. A significant portion of cases (42%) lacked prior clinical diagnoses, reflecting a potential gap in education among nondermatologists regarding BCC recognition. Conclusion The study found high concordance between clinical and pathological diagnoses of BCC, underscoring the need for improved clinical assessment skills among healthcare providers. Collaboration with dermatologists is essential for accurate diagnosis and improved patient outcomes. Enhanced training in recognizing BCC symptoms is recommended to address the identified gaps in clinical suspicion.