The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Surgical excision versus imiquimod 5% cream for nodular and superficial basal-cell carcinoma (SINS): a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Basal-cell carcinoma is the most common form of skin cancer and its incidence is increasing worldwide. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of imiquimod cream versus surgical excision in patients with low-risk basal-cell carcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, parallel-group, pragmatic, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial at 12 centres in the UK, in which patients were recruited between June 19, 2003, and Feb 22, 2007, with 3 year follow-up from June 26, 2006, to May 26, 2010. Participants of any age were eligible if they had histologically confirmed primary nodular or superficial basal-cell carcinoma at low-risk sites. We excluded patients with morphoeic or recurrent basal-cell carcinoma and those with Gorlin syndrome. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via computer-generated blocked randomisation, stratified by centre and tumour type, to receive either imiquimod 5% cream once daily for 6 weeks (superficial) or 12 weeks (nodular), or surgical excision with a 4 mm margin. The randomisation sequence was concealed from study investigators. Because of the nature of the interventions, masking of participants was not possible and masking of outcome assessors was only partly possible. The trial statistician was masked to allocation until all analyses had been done. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with clinical success, defined as absence of initial treatment failure or signs of recurrence at 3 years from start of treatment. We used a prespecified non-inferiority margin of a relative risk (RR) of 0.87. Analysis was by a modified intention-to-treat population and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial (ISRCTN48755084), and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00066872. FINDINGS: 501 participants were randomly assigned to the imiquimod group (n=254) or the surgical excision group (n=247). At year 3, 401 (80%) patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat group. At 3 years, 178 (84%) of 213 participants in the imiquimod group were treated successfully compared with 185 (98%) of 188 participants in the surgery group (RR 0.84, 98% CI 0.78-0.91; p<0.0001). No clear difference was noted between groups in patient-assessed cosmetic outcomes. The most common adverse events were itching (211 patients in the imiquimod group vs 129 in the surgery group) and weeping (160 vs 81). We recorded serious adverse events in 99 (40%) of 249 participants in the imiquimod group and 97 (42%) of 229 in the surgery group had serious adverse events, but none were regarded as related to treatment. 12 (5%) participants in the imiquimod group withdrew because of adverse events compared with four (2%) in the surgery group. INTERPRETATION: Imiquimod was inferior to surgery according to our predefined non-inferiority criterion. Although excisional surgery remains the best treatment for low-risk basal-cell carcinoma, imiquimod cream might still be a useful treatment option for small low-risk superficial or nodular basal-cell carcinoma dependent on factors such as patient preference, size and site of the lesion, and whether the patient has more than one lesion. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rhodes, L. E., de Rie, M. A., Leifsdottir, R., Yu, R. C., Bachmann, I., Goulden, V., Wong, G. A. E., Richard, M.-A., Anstey, A., & Wolf, P. (2007) · Archives of Dermatology · doi:10.1001/archderm.143.9.1131 · Cited by 275
Cited by
Guidelines of care for the management of basal cell carcinoma
Bichakjian, C., Armstrong, A., Baum, C., Bordeaux, J. S., Brown, M., Busam, K. J., Eisen, D. B., Iyengar, V., Lober, C., Margolis, D. J., et al. (2018) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.10.006 · Cited by 499
Peris, K., Fargnoli, M. C., Kaufmann, R., Arenberger, P., Bastholt, L., Seguin, N. B., Bataille, V., Brochez, L., del Marmol, V., Dummer, R., et al. (2023) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113254 · Cited by 308
Basal Cell Skin Cancer, Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Bichakjian, C. K., Olencki, T., Aasi, S. Z., Alam, M., Andersen, J. S., Berg, D., Bowen, G. M., Cheney, R. T., Daniels, G. A., Glass, L. F., et al. (2016) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2016.0065 · Cited by 275
Teledermatology for diagnosing skin cancer in adults.
Chuchu, N., Dinnes, J., Takwoingi, Y., Matin, R. N., Bayliss, S. E., Davenport, C., Moreau, J. F., Bassett, O., Godfrey, K., O'Sullivan, C., et al. (2018) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013193 · Cited by 175
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bath-Hextall, F., Ozolins, M., Armstrong, S. J., Colver, G. B., Perkins, W., Miller, P. S. J., & Williams, H. C.
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 96-105
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2161540365
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Surgical excision versus imiquimod 5% cream for nodular and superficial basal-cell carcinoma (SINS): a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70530-8
- The paper
- Bath-Hextall, F., Ozolins, M., Armstrong, S. J., Colver, G. B., Perkins, W., Miller, P. S. J., & Williams, H. C. (2014). Surgical excision versus imiquimod 5% cream for nodular and superficial basal-cell carcinoma (SINS): a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70530-8
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.