Purpose: To study the proportion of eyelid malignant tumors in an Asian Indian population and to review their clinical features and outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective study of 536 patients. Results: The mean age at presentation with eyelid malignancy was 58 years. Histopathology-proven diagnoses of these patients included sebaceous gland carcinoma (SGC) (n = 285, 53%), basal cell carcinoma (BCC) (n = 128, 24%), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (n = 99, 18%), and miscellaneous tumors (n = 24, 4%). The statistically significant differences between eyelid malignant tumors included age at presentation, tumor location, and tumor extent. The clinicopathological correlation of SGC, BCC, SCC, and miscellaneous tumors was 91, 86, 46, and 38% (p = 0.001), respectively. Comparing SGC with BCC, SCC, and miscellaneous tumors, SGC was more commonly associated with tumor recurrence (21 vs. 3, 8, and 13%; p = 0.001), systemic metastasis (13 vs. 0, 4, and 13%; p = 0.001), and death (9 vs. 0, 4, and 0%; p = 0.004). Compared to SGC, BCC, and SCC, locoregional lymph node metastasis was more common with miscellaneous tumors (26 vs. 16, < 1, and 8%; p = 0.001) over a mean follow-up period of 19 months. Conclusion: In Asian Indians, SGC is twice as common as BCC and 3 times more common than SCC. SGC is associated with poorer prognosis compared to other eyelid malignant tumors.

This content is only available via PDF.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.