Pain evaluation in patients affected by cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and actinic keratosis: an observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pain is a frequent symptom in cancer patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate the presence of pain in histopathologically-diagnosed hypertrophic actinic keratosis (AK) or cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: An observational study evaluating pain presence and intensity in skin cancer was performed, including patients affected either by SCC or by hypertrophic AK. Pain intensity was assessed using the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale, ranging from 0 (absence of pain) to 10 (most intense pain). Both spontaneous pain and pressure-related pain intensity, due to local digital pressure, were evaluated. RESULTS: In patients with SCC, spontaneous pain was present in 57.5% of the cases, while pressure-related pain was revealed in 80.0% of the cases. In hypertrophic AK patients, spontaneous pain was detected only in 15.0% of the cases, while pressure-related pain was present in 25.0% of the cases. A statistically significant difference between the 2 groups was found in the evaluation of spontaneous and pressure-related pain values, these values being significantly higher in the SCC group. No significant correlations between the degree of inflammation, the histotype or invasiveness of SCCs, and the intensity of pain were found. CONCLUSIONS: The recognition of pain as a symptom, more frequently associated with SCC, might prove useful in the clinical practice. Further research is needed, in order to better understand and characterize pain associated with different skin neoplasms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".