This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To The Editor.—
I have read with interest the article by Dr. Williamson and his colleagues in the January issue of Archives of Dermatology, entitled "Basal Cell Carcinoma of the Mandibular Gingiva" (95:76-80, 1967).The authors state that, as differential diagnosis, they contemplated a poorly differentiated spinocellular carcinoma but, because of the absence of tonofibrils and horn pearls, the cell arrangement and the benign course, they withdrew this diagnosis.However, it seems natural to ask why the differential diagnosis of ameloblastoma was not discussed.Indeed, both the macroscopical and microscopical appearance of the tumor and the benign course are compatible with this diagnosis which, also in view of the location, appears most reasonable.In this connection the article by Peterson and Gorlin, entitled "Possible Analogous Cutaneous and Odontogenic Tumors" (Arch Derm90:255-61, 1964) is of considerable interest. These authors emphasize the pronounced resemblance between the basal cell
Schønning L. DIFFERENT DIAGNOSIS. Arch Dermatol. 1967;95(6):667-668. doi:10.1001/archderm.1967.01600360113031