We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Editorial |

Assessing the Treatment of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancers

Kenneth Y. Tsai, MD, PhD
Arch Dermatol. 2011;147(5):605-606. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2011.91.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Nonmelanoma skin cancers (NMSCs), principally basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), are the most common human cancers. Accordingly, they are treated in a number of different ways. Unfortunately, there is a lack of high-quality randomized clinical trials comparing different techniques of treatment for NMSC. Recent Cochrane database reviews have focused on interventions for BCC,1 interventions for nonmetastatic cutaneous SCC,2 and a comparison between standard excision and Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) for eyelid BCC.3 In all of these reviews, a few conclusions become clear. First, there are no high-quality randomized controlled studies comparing frequently used interventions for BCC and SCC. Most studies are case series or case-control studies, and many do not have very extensive follow-up. Second, interventions are hard to compare because they are typically used in very different clinical scenarios. It may be difficult to justify MMS for low-risk tumors and sites or standard excision for high-risk ones. Finally, in an age where cost control is a serious concern, it is difficult to compare the cost-effectiveness of these interventions given the lack of long-term follow-up, complication rates, patient satisfaction, and treatment-associated morbidity.


skin cancer

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles