Secondary oral squamous cell carcinoma following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

We report the cases of 10 patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) post-haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Median latency from HSCT to oral SCC diagnosis was 10 years (range: 4-17 years), with 90% (9/10) reporting a history of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) and 40% (4/10) exhibiting active severe manifestations of oral GvHD. Clinical findings at diagnosis included induration, ulceration, tenderness, bleeding, hyperkeratosis, speckling and lymphadenopathy. The tongue and buccal mucosa were the most common sites affected. The disease stage at presentation ranged from T1N0M0 to T4N2M0. Management included surgical resection in 90% (9/10) of patients with or without chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The median follow-up for the cohort was 1 year, with a 50% (5/10) mortality rate. SCC-specific mortality was 30% (3/10). Our data highlight the importance of regular, active oral and cutaneous surveillance of patients post-HSCT in specialized dermatology clinics, irrespective of GvHD severity and length of iatrogenic immunosuppression.

The majority of observational studies in leading peer-reviewed medicine journals are not registered and do not have a publicly accessible protocol: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Observational studies are not subject to the same requirements as randomized controlled trials, such as registration or publishing a protocol. The aim of this scoping review was to estimate the registration rate of observational studies in leading peer-reviewed medicine journals and to evaluate whether protocols were available in the public domain. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In March 2023, we searched OVID Medline for observational studies published in 2022 in the top five general medicine journals according to impact factor (The Lancet, The British Medical Journal (BMJ), The Journal of the American Medical Association, The New England Journal of Medicine, and Annals of Internal Medicine). We defined an observational study as a cohort study, a case-control study, a cross-sectional study, or a case series. Information on i) the proportion of observational studies that have been registered and ii) the proportion of observational studies that have a protocol available in the public domain was extracted from a random sample of studies. RESULTS: Our search identified 699 studies; 290 studies were selected as full text, and a random sample of 200 studies was included. For half of the studies, the first author worked at a US institution. Most studies were cohort studies (n = 126, 63.0%) and used administrative healthcare records, electronic healthcare records, and registries. Of the 200 observational studies, 20 (10.0%) were registered. Among those, 14 were prospectively registered. Twenty-four studies (12.0%) had a protocol available in the public domain. Studies that were registered or had a protocol, were more frequently published in the BMJ (n = 12/28, 42.9%), had a first author working in the UK (n = 10/28, 35.7%) and used electronic health care records (n = 13/28, 46.4%) compared to studies with no registration and no protocol. CONCLUSION: The rate of prospectively registered observational studies is worryingly low. Prospective registration of observational studies should be encouraged and standardized to ensure transparency in clinical research and reduce research waste.