Differentiating Squamous Cell Carcinoma from Keratoacanthoma Using Histopathological Criteria

Abstract

Background: Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and keratoacanthoma (KA) are sometimes difficult to distinguish by histopathological examination, since cytological features are similar in both tumors. Distinctive criteria – mainly architectural – have therefore been proposed as an aid in diagnosis. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of some of the criteria used to make a distinction between SCC and KA. Methods: 296 fully excised tumors previously classified as SCC or KA were randomized and examined independently by two examiners. Fourteen criteria, mainly based on the architecture of the tumors, were determined on the 262 slides for which a consensual diagnosis was made. Results: No single criterion was sufficiently sensitive and specific to allow a clear-cut differential diagnosis. The 5 most relevant criteria were epithelial lip, sharp outline between tumor and stroma in favor of KA and ulceration, numerous mitoses and marked pleomorphism/ anaplasia in favor of SCC. Intraepithelial polymorphonuclear abscesses, intraepithelial elastic fibers, parakeratosis and dyskeratosis and extension more lateral than downward were not distinctive criteria, although they are considered as classic distinctive features. Conclusion: Many of the criteria commonly used for the differential diagnosis of SCC and KA are not reliable. The combination of the 5 most useful criteria does not significantly increase the specificity or sensitivity of the histological diagnosis in difficult cases. Atypical or difficult cases should therefore be considered and treated as SCC, since a clear-cut distinction is not possible even with the aid of the most relevant criteria.

The Role of p16, p21, p27, p53 and Ki-67 Expression in the Differential Diagnosis of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinomas and Keratoacanthomas: An Immunohistochemical Study

“…For this reason, the biopsy method preferred in these tumors is total excision (25). Cribier et al (26) revealed that, on their own, histopathological criteria are not sufficient for establishing a reliable distinction between KAs and SCCs. The authors also concluded that atypical and hard cases where no exact distinction can be made should be considered and treated as SCC .…”

Skin Tumors Induced by Sorafenib; Paradoxic RAS–RAF Pathway Activation and Oncogenic Mutations of HRAS, TP53, and TGFBR1

“…KA is a rapidly growing keratotic and crateriform tumor, very similar clinically and pathologically to well-differentiated SCC (16). It is characterized by frequent spontaneous resolution and originates from hair follicles (17).…”

A case report of Keratoacanthoma (KA) of the alveolar ridge of the maxilla

“…Helpful criteria for the diagnosis of keratoacanthoma included epithelial lip, sharp out line between tumour and stroma and ulceration. Criteria more commonly seen in SCCs included numerous mitosis and marked cellular pleomorphism 11 . Ko 5 revealed in his review many markers for epidermal differentiation and intercellular adhesion to differentiate between keratoacanthoma and SCCs.…”