METHODS: The medical records of 118 Malay patients with oral cancer admitted in HUSM from 1st January 1986 to 31st December 2005 were reviewed. Data collected include socio-demographic background, high-risk habits practiced, clinical and histological characteristics, and treatment profile of the patients. Survival status and duration were determined by active validation until 31st December 2006. Data entry and analysis were accomplished using SPSS version 12.0. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to perform survival estimates while the log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards regression model were employed to perform univariate analysis and multivariable analysis of the variables, respectively.
RESULTS: The overall five-year survival rate of Malay patients with oral cancer was 18.0%, with a median survival time of 9 months. Significant factors that influenced survival of the patients were age, sex, tumour site, TNM stage, histological type, and treatment received.
CONCLUSION: Survival of oral cancer patients in HUSM was very low. Being elderly, male, presenting with an advanced stage at diagnosis, and not having treatment all contributed to poor survival.
METHODS: Dentists were recruited through two main dental associations in Malaysia and attended a 1-day training session on recognizing abnormalities within the oral cavity. Following the training, the dentists conducted screening and provided risk habits cessation advice at their respective clinics for 6 months. The impact of the program was evaluated by determining the number of patients who were screened and/or provided with risk habits cessation advice.
RESULTS: Twenty-six dentists took part in the program and conducted opportunistic screening on a total of 2603 individuals. On average, they screened about 23.0% of their patients and 5.1% were given risk habits cessation advice. Notably, dentists who had lower patient load were more likely to conduct opportunistic screening.
CONCLUSIONS: While the participating private dentists state that they have a role in performing opportunistic screening and providing risk habits cessation advice, these activities are still not a priority area in the private clinics, strongly suggesting that strategies to motivate dentists in this setting are urgently needed.
METHODS: A retrospective record review was conducted from August to December 2006 in HUSM. Of 133 patients with oral cancer diagnosed from 1986 to 2005, 118 were Malay. Data on socio-demographic background, high-risk habits practiced, clinical and histological characteristics, and treatment profile of the patients were obtained.
RESULTS: Malay patients with oral cancer were predominantly elderly, aged 60 years old and above (51.7%) at the time of diagnosis, with a mean age of 58.1 years (SD 16.81). Most patients were males (64.4%) and the majority of them were married (83.9%). More than half (58.5%) had been smokers, and of those who smoked, 89.9% were males. Some had a betel quid chewing habit (22.9%) but none ever consumed alcohol. The majority of the patients (77.1%) were diagnosed at stage IV. The tongue was the most usual site involved (37.3%) and squamous cell carcinoma was the most common histological type seen (75.4%).
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of oral cancer among Malay patients in HUSM is high (88.7%). It is predominantly found in elderly males and the majority of cases present at advanced stage.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted on all Malaysian ethnic groups aged ≥15 years old at eight strategically chosen shopping malls within a two week time period. Data were analysed using chi-square tests and multiple logistic regression. Significance level was set at α<0.05.
RESULTS: Most (84.2%) respondents had heard of oral cancer. Smoking was the most (92.4%) recognized high risk habit. Similar levels of awareness were seen for unhealed ulcers (57.3%) and red/white patches (58.0%) as signs of oral cancer. Age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, education, occupation and income were significantly associated with oral cancer awareness (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: There was a general lack of awareness regarding the risk habits, early signs and symptoms, and the benefits of detecting this disease at an early stage. Mass media and health campaigns were the main sources of information about oral cancer. In our Malaysian population, gender and age were significantly associated with the awareness of early signs and symptoms and prevention of oral cancer, respectively.
METHODS: A literature review was conducted using the keyword of "Odontogenic carcinosarcoma" and all relevant articles were screened. The data collected include demographic profile (age, gender), clinical information (symptoms, location, size), radiologic features, histopathological examination, management, recurrence, metastases, and survival status.
RESULTS: A total of 17 OCS cases including a new case from our hospital. The incidence of OCS was highest in the third decades of life with predilection for male and posterior region of mandible. Clinically, patients may present with swelling and neurological symptoms. Radiographic examination often showed radiolucency with ill-defined border. This tumour demonstrates an aggressive behaviour with reported cases of distant metastases to the lung, lymph nodes, rib, and pelvis. Here, we report an interesting case of OCS in a 38-year-old man with a previous diagnosis of ameloblastoma. The patient was diagnosed with ameloblastoma but refused surgical intervention and returned after 10 years with rapidly enlarging mass on the right side of mandible. Microscopically, the lesion appears as biphasic odontogenic tumour with malignant cytological features seen in both epithelium and mesenchymal components. The spindle to round mesenchymal tumour cells were only positive for vimentin. Ki67 proliferation index was high in both epithelium and mesenchymal components.
CONCLUSION: This case showed the tendency of untreated ameloblastoma to undergo malignant changes in the long term.
METHODS: This retrospective case-control study involves 790 cases of cancers of the oral cavity and 450 controls presenting with non-malignant oral diseases, recruited from seven hospital-based centres nationwide. Data on risk habits (smoking, drinking, chewing) were obtained using a structured questionnaire via face-to-face interviews. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine association between risk habits and oral cancer risk; chi-square test was used to assess association between risk habits and ethnicity. Population attributable risks were calculated for all habits.
RESULTS: Except for alcohol consumption, increased risk was observed for all habits; the highest risk was for smoking + chewing + drinking (aOR 22.37 95% CI 5.06, 98.95). Significant ethnic differences were observed in the practice of habits. The most common habit among Malays was smoking (24.2%); smoking + drinking were most common among Chinese (16.8%), whereas chewing was the most prevalent among Indians (45.2%) and Indigenous people (24.8%). Cessation of chewing, smoking and drinking is estimated to reduce cancer incidence by 22.6%, 8.5% and 6.9%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Ethnic variations in the practice of oral cancer risk habits are evident. Betel quid chewing is the biggest attributable factor for this population.
METHODS: Two villages were selected as the sampling frame based on prevalence of tobacco and betel quid chewing habit. Respondents were asked to check their mouth for presence of lesion or abnormalities. Education on oral cancer, including MSE, was provided. Subsequently, respondents were asked to perform MSE. Finally, a clinical oral examination (COE) was done by a specialist and the presence of oral mucosal lesions was recorded.
RESULTS: Almost 64.5 percent of respondents exhibited high levels of difficulty and low mucosal visualization and retracting ability, whereas 3.0 percent demonstrated high attention level when performing MSE. Prevalence of oral mucosal lesions was 59.0 percent, whereas the prevalence of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) was 9.0 percent. Detection of oral lesions by respondents using MSE was lower than detection by the gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity of MSE for detection of all types of lesions were 8.6 and 95.0 percent respectively. When analyzing each lesion type separately, MSE was found to be most sensitive in detection of swellings (10.0 percent), and most specific in identifying white lesions (97.8 percent). For detection of OPMDs, although specificity was high (98.9 percent), sensitivity (0 percent), and +LR (0) was poor.
CONCLUSION: MSE is not an effective self-screening tool for early detection of potentially malignant lesions for this population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen individuals with a range of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD) and normal oral mucosa were included. Five areas of the oral cavity were photographed by three dentists using mobile phone cameras with 5 MP-13 MP resolutions. On the same day, the patients were given COE by two oral medicine specialists (OMS) and 3 weeks later, they reviewed the images taken using the phone, and concordance was examined between the two by Kappa statistics. The sensitivity and specificity of clinical diagnosis using the phone images were also measured. Pre- and post-program questionnaires were answered by both the dentists and the OMS to determine the feasibility of integrating teledentistry in their clinical practice.
RESULTS: The Kappa values in determining the presence of lesion, category of lesion (OPMD or not), and making referral decision were moderate to strong (0.64-1.00). The overall sensitivity was more than 70% and specificity was 100%. The false negative rate decreased as the camera resolution increased. All dentists agreed that the process could facilitate early detection of oral mucosal lesion, and was easy to use in the clinic.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that teledentistry can be used for communication between primary care and OMS and could be readily integrated into clinical setting for patient management.