[Skip to Navigation]
Original Investigation
September 8, 2021

Evaluation of Watchful Waiting and Tumor Behavior in Patients With Basal Cell Carcinoma: An Observational Cohort Study of 280 Basal Cell Carcinomas in 89 Patients

Author Affiliations
  • 1Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Dermatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
  • 2Department of Biostatistics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(10):1174-1181. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.3020
Key Points

Question  What are reasons for watchful waiting in basal cell carcinoma (BCC), and what is the tumor behavior?

Findings  In this cohort study of 280 BCCs in 89 patients in the Netherlands, patient-related factors (eg, limited life expectancy or frailty) were the most important reasons to choose watchful waiting. The minority of tumors increased in size (46.8%); of those, infiltrative/micronodular BCCs were estimated at a tumor increase of 4.46 mm in 1 year, whereas nodular, superficial, or clinical BCCs were estimated at 1.06-mm growth in 1 year.

Meaning  Watchful waiting might be an appropriate approach in patients with BCC with a limited life expectancy and asymptomatic nodular or superficial BCCs.

Abstract

Importance  Few studies have examined watchful waiting (WW) in patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC), although this approach might be suitable in patients who might not live long enough to benefit from treatment.

Objective  To evaluate reasons for WW and to document the natural course of BCC in patients who chose WW and reasons to initiate later treatment.

Design, Setting, and Participants  An observational cohort study was performed at a single institution between January 2018 and November 2020 studying patients with 1 or more untreated BCC for 3 months or longer.

Exposures  Watchful waiting was chosen by patients and proxies regardless of this study.

Main Outcome and Measures  The reasons for WW and treatment were extracted from patient files and were categorized for analyses. Linear mixed models were used to estimate tumor growth and identify covariates associated with tumor growth.

Results  Watchful waiting was chosen for 280 BCCs in 89 patients (47 men [53%] and 42 women [47%]), with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up of 9 (4-15) months. The median (IQR) age of the included patients was 83 (73-88) years. Patient-related factors or preferences (ie, prioritizations of comorbidities, severe frailty, or limited life expectancy) were reasons to initiate WW in 74 (83%) patients, followed by tumor-related factors (n = 49; 55%). Treatment-related and circumstantial reasons were important for 35% and 46% of the patients, respectively. The minority of tumors increased in size (47%). Tumor growth was associated with BCC subtype (odds ratio, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.47-7.96; P = .005), but not with initial tumor size and location. The estimated tumor diameter increase was 4.46 mm (80% prediction interval, 1.42 to 7.46 mm) in 1 year for BCCs containing at least an infiltrative/micronodular component and 1.06 mm (80% prediction interval, −1.79 to 4.28 mm) for the remaining BCCs (only nodular/superficial component/clinical diagnosis). Most common reasons to initiate treatment were tumor burden or potential tumor burden, resolved reason(s) for WW, and reevaluation of patient-related factors.

Conclusions and Relevance  In this cohort study of patients with BCC, WW was an appropriate approach in several patients, especially those with asymptomatic nodular or superficial BCCs and a limited life expectancy. Patients should be followed up regularly to determine whether a WW approach is still suitable and whether patients still prefer WW and to reconsider consequences of treatment and refraining from treatment.

Add or change institution
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    ×