A randomized split-face clinical trial of conventional vs indoor-daylight photodynamic therapy for the treatment of multiple actinic keratosis of the face and scalp and photoaging

Pre-treatment with topical 5-fluorouracil increases the efficacy of daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses - A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Daylight photodynamic therapy (dPDT) and topical 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) are each effective treatments for thin grade I actinic keratosis (AKs), but less so for thicker grade II-III AKs. Prolonged topical treatment regimens can be associated with severe skin reactions and low compliance. This study compares the efficacy of sequential 4 % 5-FU and dPDT with dPDT monotherapy for multiple actinic keratoses.

METHODS

Sixty patients with a total of 1547 AKs (grade I: 1278; grade II: 246; grade III: 23) were treated in two symmetrical areas (mean size 75 cm2) of the face or scalp, which were randomized to (i) 4% 5-FU creme twice daily for 7 days before a single dPDT procedure and (ii) dPDT monotherapy. Daylight exposure was either outdoor or indoor daylight.

RESULTS

Twelve weeks after treatment 87 % of all AKs cleared after 5-FU+dPDT compared to 74 % after dPDT alone (p<0.0001). For grade II AKs, the lesion response rate increased from 55 % with dPDT monotherapy to 79 % after 5-FU+dPDT (p<0.0056). Moderate/severe erythema was seen in 88 % 5-FU+dPDT areas compared to 41 % of dPDT areas two days after dPDT. Twelve weeks after treatment 75 % of the patients were very satisfied with both treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential 5-FU and dPDT was more effective than dPDT monotherapy in the treatment of AKs, especially for grade II AKs. Local skin reactions were more pronounced after combination treatment, but no patients discontinued the treatment. The combination of 5-FU and dPDT is an effective treatment of large treatment areas with high compliance and satisfaction.

Is a 4 J/cm2 PpIX-Weighted Simulated Daylight (SDL-PDT) Dose Still Efficient for Photodynamic Therapy of Actinic Keratosis?

Background: Several solutions are now proposed to provide indoor illumination with so-called artificial white light or simulated daylight (SDL-PDT), resulting in an effective treatment for actinic keratosis (AK). However, the optimal PpIX-weighted light dose is still debated. Integrating the effective irradiance over the irradiation time yields the effective light dose, which is also known as the protoporphyrin IX-weighted light dose and is a key parameter for the efficacy of the treatment. Objectives: The paper aims to report the clinical outcomes of SDL-PDT when using the PpIX-weighted light dose of 4 J/cm2, in patients treated for AK lesions of the scalp or the face at our medical dermatology center (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT052036). Methods: A total of 30 patients (16 males, 14 females), with a mean age of 71.0 ± 10.2, with phototype 1 (16 patients) and phototype 2 (14 patients) with grade I-II AK were treated with a drug light interval (DLI) of 10 min and a light exposure of 35 min (Dermaris, Surgiris, Croix, France), corresponding to a PpIX-weighted light dose of 4 J/cm2. The primary endpoint was the cure rate of patients at six months post-treatment. Secondary endpoints included scores of pain, erythema, crusts, and discomfort during or/and post the treatment. Results: In total, 762 AK were treated. Six months following treatment, the cure rate of the patients was 77%. The median pain score was less than 1 out of 10 for most of the patients. Erythema was observed in all patients and lasted 3 days (±1.5 day). Crusts were seen in 28 patients. Discomfort was reported as mild or less in more than 97% of patients. Conclusions: The shortening of the PpIX-weighted light dose to 4 J/cm2, corresponding to an illumination duration of 35 min with the Dermaris, does not modify the efficacy of the SDL-PDT. This observation is in agreement with recent published data demonstrating that the light dose can be reduced. Furthermore, this clinical study confirmed that SDL-PDT is an effective and nearly painless treatment with minimal side effects for patients with AK lesions of the scalp.

A Review of MAL-PDT for the Treatment Strategy of Actinic Keratosis: Broader Clinical Perspectives Beyond the Data and Guideline Recommendations

Methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) is a topical compound approved for use with photodynamic therapy (PDT) for the treatment of actinic keratosis (AK) and field cancerization in certain countries. There exists a high burden of disease for patients with AK: repeated treatments are required, there is a known risk of progression to keratinocyte carcinoma, and cosmetic appearance is affected. Delivery of PDT using MAL is a flexible treatment strategy available in many forms; red light, daylight, or artificial daylight can be used for illumination, all of which result in high AK clearance rates and low recurrence. MAL-PDT protocols continue to evolve to further improve adherence and treatment outcomes. Here, we used PubMed to search MEDLINE to identify guidelines, consensus recommendations, and studies describing the use of MAL for the treatment of AK. The aim of this targeted review is to consider various MAL-PDT treatment strategies on the basis of published literature, with a focus on personalizing treatment for the heterogeneous AK population.

Topical Pharmacotherapy for Actinic Keratoses in Older Adults

Actinic keratosis is caused by excessive lifetime sun exposure. It must be treated, regardless of thickness, because it is the biologic precursor of invasive squamous cell carcinoma, a potentially deadly malignancy. Physical ablative techniques such as cryotherapy, lasers, and curettage are the most used treatments for isolated lesions. Multiple lesions are treated with topical drugs, chemical peelings, and physical techniques. Drug preparations containing diclofenac plus hyaluronate, aminolevulinic acid, and methyl aminolevulinate and different concentrations of imiquimod and 5-fluorouracil are approved for this clinical indication. All treatments have a good profile of efficacy and tolerability although there are relevant differences in the clearance rate, tolerability, and type and frequency of adverse effects. In addition, they have very different mechanisms of action and treatment protocols. No differences in the efficacy and tolerability were found in older patients compared with younger patients, therefore no dose adjustments are needed. That said, older patients often need to be motivated to treat actinic keratoses and a careful attention to expectations, needs, and preferences should be used to obtain the maximal adherence and prevent treatment failure. This goal can be achieved with a careful evaluation not only of published efficacy, toxicity, and tolerability data but also of practical topics such as the frequency of daily applications, the overall duration of therapy, and the need for a caregiver. Finally, particular attention must be paid in the case of frail patients and immunosuppressed patients.