Talk:Oral cancer

message: Although I have allowed the lengthy exposition on the Vizilite device to remain, I would point out that this section needs a re-write. While there is no doubt that the average dental practitioner would benefit from an accurate and simple screening device for oral cancer, the general readership is not well-served by blatantly unbalanced advertising copy. Readers should be advised that to date, the Vizilite plays little role in the diagnosis of oral neoplastic disease in dental practice, regardless of its potential merit. The jury is still out among members of the oral pathology community; see the following link to a typical post on the topic, dated November 2005, from the Bulletin Board of Oral Pathology Listserv: Re: Vizilte study at USC in 2002. The same could be said of the Oral CDx brush "biopsy" system, and the sad collaboration between its parent company and the American Dental Association-- something that casts a cloud on the ADA's ostensible mission of acting in the public interest. The traditional, and to date the most reliable method of detection of cancer remains a visual, tactile, and radiographic examination of the mouth, lips, and the regional lymph nodes. The only reliable laboratory technique of diagnosing oral cancer is a microscopic examination of a properly obtained and properly prepared biopsy specimen. This fact, however, is nowhere to be found in this section.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 23:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: Signs and tests

message: Should teeth-related cancers, such as the one affecting Novemthree, be added? I think so, but I don't know if it belongs here. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 04:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason why this particular case is inappropriate here is that it does not represent cancer. The important point is that there are benign tumors and there are malignant tumors, and the Novemthree case is benign. The distinction is technical; in the generic semantic sense, this tumor was certainly malignant to the extent in which it inflicted damage. However, a true cancer generally must manifest certain microscopic and clinical characteristics. In general, cancers have the potential to spread (metastasize) to remote parts of the body, be locally invasive both grossly and microscopically, and demonstrate the microscopic quality of anaplasia (also see .--Mark Bornfeld DDS 12:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teeth-related cancers 

message: I have deleted this paragraph. Whilst I think that a more detailed discussion of surgery may be helpful, the deleted section was merely a list of procedures, some of which are non-specific or not strictly relevant to oral cancer, and which were not put in any useful sort of context. The style was poor (use of second person.) I would also contest the assertion that a (functioning) tongue can be reconstructed "from other parts of your body" following total glossectomy. In fact the rehabilitation following total glossectomy is extremely difficult, which is why this operation is seldom performed.Jellytussle 15:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Surgeries for Oral Cancer" 

message: Please add an additional picture, because the existing picture may seem to imply that oral cancer is normally accompanied by an obvious sign, but many oral cancers are actually non-obvious and can only be detected by careful examination.
108.56.238.89 (talk) 00:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends when it is detected. This is pretty obvious, I agree, but oral cancer usually presents late so I wouldn't call this atypical. We can always do with more clinical pictures. Different site, e.g. floor of mouth, or perhaps a premalignant lesion would be good. Lesion (talk) 00:31, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Found some more imgs on commons. There is a bit more variety now, but it would still be good to get a picture of an early malignant ulcer. Lesion (talk) 12:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Oral cancer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120319153756/http://www.ada.org/sections/professionalResources/pdfs/topics_cancer_brief_mouthrinses.pdf to http://www.ada.org/sections/professionalResources/pdfs/topics_cancer_brief_mouthrinses.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090502074028/http://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/news_details.php?news_id=755&year=2008 to http://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/news_details.php?news_id=755&year=2008
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:37, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, I am a dentist and medical researcher, I just added information from a Cochrane systematic review. 
MeisserMadera (talk) 14:22, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added new treatment options 

message: For those who wish to help, and are looking for a reliable source.  See Shah et al, CURRENT CONCEPTS IN MANAGEMENT OF ORAL CANCER – SURGERY Ian Furst (talk) 01:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good source 

message: "Recent data suggest that individuals that come to the disease from this particular cause..." changed to "Recent data suggest that individuals who develop the disease from this particular cause...".  Please advise if problematic.  H Bruce Campbell (talk) 06:23, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simple composition refinement.