Basal cell carcinoma of the lower eyelid is an actinic-induced cancer: The ABCDE concept to explain the relationship between the invasiveness of basal cell carcinoma and actinic damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) originates from the basal cells in the epidermis and is particularly prevalent on the eyelid. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation, a key factor in BCC development, induces fibroblast actinic damage and abnormal elastic fiber deposition, leading to cancer development. This study investigates the relationship between UV radiation and BCC on the lower eyelid by examining the incidence and characteristics of this cancer across diverse geographic regions. Materials and Methods: A cohort of 813 BCC eyelid patients from Canada was analyzed. Tumor locations (lower vs. upper eyelid) were recorded. The histopathological evaluation included 707 lower eyelid BCC cases and 493 benign lesions of the lower eyelid. Actinic damage was graded on a scale of 0–3. The presence of in situ BCC was assessed. Results: Results revealed a consistent trend: 87% of Canadian BCC cases occurred on the lower eyelid. Severe actinic damage was observed in 89% of pathological lesions, with 11% showing moderate damage. In contrast, 93% of benign lesions had no detectable actinic damage, whereas 7% showed mild damage. Notably, no BCC cases were in the in situ phase, indicating advanced disease upon diagnosis. Conclusion: These findings confirm that BCC of the lower eyelid is primarily induced by UV radiation exposure. Actinic damage in fibroblasts leads to DNA alterations in dermal fibroblasts and is the hallmark feature in sclerosing BCC. This highlights the critical role of UV-induced genetic damage in the pathogenesis of lower eyelid BCC, emphasizing the need for preventive strategies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".