Regular clinical follow-up of oral potentially malignant disorders results in improved survival for patients who develop oral cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether clinical follow-up programs of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD) result in earlier detection and improved survival rates if malignant transformation occurs, as compared to OPMD patients without follow-up and other patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three OSCC groups were retrospectively studied for disease stage at diagnosis and survival rates (N = 739): Group A, patients with OSCC with regular follow-up of preceding OPMD (N = 94); Group B, patients with OSCC with preceding OPMD but no follow-up (N = 68); Group C, patients with OSCC without previously known OPMD diagnosis (N = 577). RESULTS: The patients with OPMD with follow-up (Group A) was diagnosed at a significantly earlier stage and have significantly higher survival rates compared to Group B (p < 0.001 and p = 0.022, respectively) and Group C (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference between Group B and Group C in terms of survival rate (p = 0.143) or stage at diagnosis (p = 0.475). Patients with OPMD and follow-up (Group A) had a 5-year net survival rate of 90.0% (95%CI 80.3-100.8%), as compared to 68.3% percent (95% CI 54.5-85.7) for Group B and 56.1% (95% CI 51.4-61.3) for Group C. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that regular follow-up of patients with OPMD results in earlier detection of OSCC (if malignant transformation occurs) and improved survival.

Survival and prognostic factors after transplantation, resection and ablation in a national cohort of early hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In patients with early hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and preserved liver function, the choice between transplantation, resection and ablation and which factors to consider is not obvious and guidelines differ. In this national cohort study, we aimed to compare posttreatment survival in patients fulfilling predefined criteria, and to analyse preoperative risk factors that could influence decision. METHODS: We used data from HCC-patients registered with primary transplantation, resection or ablation 2008-2016 in the SweLiv-registry. In Child A-subgroups, 18-75 years, we compared survival after transplantation or resection, with different tumour criteria; either corresponding to our transplantation criteria (N = 257) or stricter with single tumours ≤50 mm (N = 159). A subgroup with single tumours ≤30 mm, compared all three treatments (N = 193). RESULTS: We included 1022 HCC-patients; transplantation n = 223, resection n = 438, ablation n = 361. In the transplant criteria subgroup, differences in five-year survival, adjusted for age and gender, were not significant, with 71.2% (CI 62.3-81.3) after transplantation (n = 109) and 63.5% (CI 54.9-73.5) after resection (n = 148). Good liver function (Child 5 vs. 6, Albumin ≥36), increased the risk after transplantation, but decreased the risk after resection and ablation. CONCLUSION: Even within Child A, detailed liver function assessment is important before treatment decision, and for stratifying survival comparisons.