Despite Convolutional Neural Networks having reached human-level performance in some medical tasks, their clinical use has been hindered by their lack of interpretability. Two major interpretability strategies have been proposed to tackle this problem: post-hoc methods and intrinsic methods. Although there are several post-hoc methods to interpret DL models, there is significant variation between the explanations provided by each method, and it a difficult to validate them due to the lack of ground-truth. To address this challenge, we adapted the intrinsical interpretable ProtoPNet for the context of histopathology imaging and compared the attribution maps produced by it and the saliency maps made by post-hoc methods. To evaluate the similarity between saliency map methods and attribution maps we adapted 10 saliency metrics from the saliency model literature, and used the breast cancer metastases detection dataset PatchCamelyon with 327,680 patches of histopathological images of sentinel lymph node sections to validate the proposed approach. Overall, SmoothGrad and Occlusion were found to have a statistically bigger overlap with ProtoPNet while Deconvolution and Lime have been found to have the least.