About
skinoncology.net is a free UK clinical reference for skin oncology, written for the doctors, specialist nurses and allied health professionals who diagnose, excise, stage and reconstruct cutaneous malignancy in NHS practice. It exists to turn the UK's fragmented skin cancer evidence base (NICE, BAD, BSDS, BAPRAS, RCPath, Cancer Alliance pathways) into something quick to consult in clinic and detailed enough to revise from at the desk.
The site is written and maintained by a single author: a Consultant Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeon with a sub-specialty interest in skin oncology and reconstruction, and nearly 20 years of NHS clinical practice in this area. There is no editorial board. See about the author and editorial approach for the full picture, including what single authorship means for the reader.
What's on the site
- Monographs — clinical articles on every common and rare cutaneous malignancy, pre-malignant condition and related cancer syndrome.
- Tools — UK-guideline-aligned calculators for staging, margin planning, follow-up scheduling and 2-week-wait triage.
- Reconstruction atlas — defect-driven flap and graft selection by anatomical site, written from a plastic-surgical perspective.
- Dermoscopy reference — pattern-based diagnosis with clinical correlates.
- Cases — stepwise interactive cases drawn from UK practice.
- Guidelines hub — curated index of NICE, BAD and RCPath guidance with brief summaries and direct links.
Who it's for
The site is intended for UK registered healthcare professionals — GPs, GPs with extended role, dermatologists, plastic and head & neck surgeons, medical and clinical oncologists, specialist nurses, trainees and allied health professionals. It does not provide individual medical advice for patients.
How content is maintained
Every article carries an explicit last reviewed date in its header. Articles are revisited at least annually; high-churn topics such as melanoma systemic therapy and Merkel cell carcinoma are revisited as guidance changes. Where evidence is contested or evolving, that is stated in the article rather than glossed over. Where a recommendation could reasonably be questioned, it is tagged with its evidence basis — see the evidence grading key.
What the site is not
- It is not a substitute for an MDT decision in an individual patient.
- It is not a source of medical advice for patients.
- It is not a peer-reviewed journal. Articles are clinician-authored summary content, anchored to UK national guidance.