keloids typically exhibit increased cellularity. Keloids malignant degeneration has been reported, although a fibrosarcoma can mimic keloid clinically.
I pose the controversial question, are keloids by definition a real entity. My experience of working around the world is that so-called keloid scars are only exaggerated hypertrophic scars, I.e. They are always within the borders of the original injury. We call them keloid like scars, ie very thick with rolled edges etc. I have a lot of experience with removing "keloid scars" from ear lobes in females in the pacific. They usually recur to a certain degree, but it does not matter how many times one removes them in an individual, there is always ample earlobe to preserve. In other wards they do not invade normal tissue.
Dear Khalid its a creative hypothesis. I agree to great extent as I have tried the change cellular PH noticed that keloid get atrophic and return to scar stage.
Keloid fibroblasts, unlike those from hypertrophic scar tissue, are hyperresponsive to both TGF-β, which is abundant in healing wounds, and PDGF. Keloid fibroblasts in culture secrete increased amounts of collagen and glycosaminoglycans for several passages in tissue culture. It is unclear whether these cells represent a normal subgroup or have undergone transformation. Altered expression of proteoglycans in keloids may affect the three-dimensional organization of collagen fibres. Malignant degeneration has been reported, although a fibrosarcoma can mimic keloid clinically. So nothing to prove its presence or not in other organs than skin!?