This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (8)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Review of Histopathological Specimens Previously Diagnosed as Keratoacanthoma or as Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Skin

LT. WILLIAM S. BROTHERS, (MC); CAPT. WILLIAM N. NEW, (MC); WALTER R. NICKEL, M.D.

AMA Arch Derm. 1960;81(3):369-372.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The first report of keratoacanthoma appearing in the American literature was in 1954.¹ These lesions were being reported in the European literature as early as 1950.² In the United States, prior to 1954, these lesions were undoubtedly either classified as squamous cell carcinoma of the skin, or placed in the group entitled "Tumorlike Keratoses."³

The fact that these lesions were not reported as a definite entity in this country prior to 1954, coupled with the flood of reports in the literature⁴ since 1954, raises the following questions. Are we seeing a new entity? Have we always seen these lesions, but diagnosed them as other entities, such as squamous cell carcinoma of the skin? These questions could, in part, be answered by reviewing the pathological specimens of keratoacanthoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin during this transitional period. Hence this study.

Procedure

All available histopathological material diagnosed as keratoacanthoma and as squamous cell carcinoma of the skin at the U.S. Naval Hospital, San Diego, California, from 1951 through 1957, was reviewed. This represented 233 cases. Nineteen cases of keratoacanthoma, and 214 cases reported as squamous cell carcinoma, usually grade one, of the skin, were reviewed. After careful examination, 21 sections, previously diagnosed as squamous cell carcinoma, were considered to be keratoacanthoma. See Table 1 and Table 2 for . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
U.S.N.; U.S.N.; San Diego, Calif.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication July 1, 1959.

The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private ones of the writers, and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the Navy Department or the Naval Service at large.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?