BVA decisions by condition

Neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer): BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) issue in 832 decisions. It granted the neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) issue in 11.5% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 52.6%, and remanded it in 35.8%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 18.0% were granted.

Decisions

832

2017–2026

Granted

11.5%

All conditions: 19.4%

Granted on the merits

18.0%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

35.8%

Denied: 52.6%

Neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
79
6.3%68.4%22.8%
2019
101
8.9%60.4%30.7%
2020
122
4.9%56.6%40.2%
2021
86
7.0%52.3%37.2%
2022
82
14.6%45.1%43.9%
2023
106
15.1%43.4%42.5%
2024
105
16.2%46.7%36.2%
2025
79
15.2%46.8%38.0%

Evidence in granted and denied neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion13951.8%8.8%+42.9 pts
Treating physician opinion4253.3%15.9%+37.5 pts
Favorable VA exam9941.0%14.0%+27.0 pts
Private medical opinion27131.3%10.5%+20.7 pts
Combat service5524.4%17.4%+6.9 pts
Claimed as secondary12623.6%17.3%+6.3 pts
Lay statement63811.2%45.3%−34.1 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 76.0% of the decisions that granted neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer).
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 22.9% of grants and 10.3% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion43116.2%20.5%−4.4 pts
Unfavorable VA exam56814.8%28.1%−13.3 pts

Why the Board granted or denied neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer)

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established15
  2. Presumed herbicide exposure due to vietnam service2
  3. Presumed herbicide exposure during vietnam service2
  4. Veteran served in vietnam, presumed herbicide exposure2

Most common reasons in denials

  1. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim38
  2. No current diagnosis29
  3. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis26
  4. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service24
  5. Service records negative or silent24
  6. Current diagnosis established19
  7. No evidence of in-service dental trauma7
  8. Criteria for service connection not met7

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26038801Tiffany Dawson · 2026

AOJ conceded asbestos exposure; Conflicting VA medical opinions regarding cause of cancer; Inadequate VA opinions failed to address squamous cell carcinoma and UV exposure; Restored service connection due to improper severance

Citation Nr. A26034820Shaun S. Speranza · 2026

Presumptive link to herbicide exposure; Positive nexus from VA examiner; Equitable evidence balance resolved in veteran's favor

Citation Nr. A26022987H.M. Walker · 2026

Approximate balance of evidence; Benefit of the doubt applied; Private opinion found highly probative

Denied

Citation Nr. A26035197S. B. Mays · 2026

Evidence persuasively weighs against onset during service or within one year of separation.; VA examiner provided negative opinion linking BCC to service exposures (asbestos, cleaning chemicals).; No indication BCC is associated with service-connected disabilities.

Citation Nr. A26033969Michael Martin · 2026

No evidence of in-service dental trauma; No compensable dental conditions documented; Dental issues not due to trauma/osteomyelitis

Citation Nr. A26030264Paul Sorisio · 2026

VA dental examination found no dental condition related to service.; Veteran's dental issues did not meet VA criteria for compensation.; Benefit-of-the-doubt rule inapplicable as evidence weighed against the claim.

Rules that apply to neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) claims

Research your neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a neoplasm hard and soft tissue malignant (oral cancer) issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.