Self-administration of hospital-based narrowband ultraviolet B (TL-01) phototherapy: a feasibility study in an outpatient setting

Frequency of phototherapy for treating psoriasis: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Narrow band ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) and psoralen-ultraviolet A (PUVA) remain inexpensive and effective anti-psoriatic therapies adopted worldwide with different frequency protocols. We aimed to systematically assess the evidence on the effects of different frequency protocols of phototherapy in treating psoriasis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We used the following terms, namely "photochemotherapy", "phototherapy", "psoriasis", "UVB", "UVA" and "ultraviolet therapy", to search the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, MEDLINE and Embase databases on August 1, 2019. We organized results using a PRISM diagram and analyzed bias risks with RoB-2 tool.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We included five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on oral PUVA and three RCTs on NB-UVB. The five studies on PUVA included a total of 1452 patients with plaque psoriasis and did not find any significant difference in efficacy comparing two- vs. three- vs. four times weekly protocols. The three studies on NB-UVB included a total of 248 patients with plaque psoriasis. No differences in efficacy were reported in comparing different frequencies in delivering NB-UVB, namely twice vs. thrice weekly, twice vs. four times weekly, and thrice- vs. five times weekly protocols. Although protocols with higher treatments frequency per week achieved clearance faster than lower frequency ones, but they did not differ in terms of efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

PUVA and NB-UVB remain an effective anti-psoriatic treatment; however further studies are needed to elucidate which protocol may be more effective in different skin phototypes.

Home-based narrowband UVB, topical corticosteroid or combination for children and adults with vitiligo: HI-Light Vitiligo three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews suggest that narrowband ultraviolet B light combined with treatments such as topical corticosteroids may be more effective than monotherapy for vitiligo.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topical corticosteroid monotherapy compared with (1) hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light monotherapy and (2) hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light/topical corticosteroid combination treatment for localised vitiligo.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, three-arm, randomised controlled trial with 9 months of treatment and a 12-month follow-up.

SETTING

Sixteen UK hospitals - participants were recruited from primary and secondary care and the community.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active non-segmental vitiligo affecting ≤ 10% of their body area.

INTERVENTIONS

Topical corticosteroids [mometasone furoate 0.1% (Elocon®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) plus dummy narrowband ultraviolet B light]; narrowband ultraviolet B light (narrowband ultraviolet B light plus placebo topical corticosteroids); or combination (topical corticosteroids plus narrowband ultraviolet B light). Topical corticosteroids were applied once daily on alternate weeks and narrowband ultraviolet B light was administered every other day in escalating doses, with a dose adjustment for erythema. All treatments were home based.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was self-assessed treatment success for a chosen target patch after 9 months of treatment ('a lot less noticeable' or 'no longer noticeable' on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale). Secondary outcomes included blinded assessment of primary outcome and percentage repigmentation, onset and maintenance of treatment response, quality of life, side effects, treatment burden and cost-effectiveness (cost per additional successful treatment).

RESULTS

In total, 517 participants were randomised (adults, n = 398; and children, n =  119; 52% male; 57% paler skin types I-III, 43% darker skin types IV-VI). At the end of 9 months of treatment, 370 (72%) participants provided primary outcome data. The median percentage of narrowband ultraviolet B light treatment-days (actual/allocated) was 81% for topical corticosteroids, 77% for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 74% for combination groups; and for ointment was 79% for topical corticosteroids, 83% for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 77% for combination. Target patch location was head and neck (31%), hands and feet (32%), and rest of the body (37%). Target patch treatment 'success' was 20 out of 119 (17%) for topical corticosteroids, 27 out of 123 (22%) for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 34 out of 128 (27%) for combination. Combination treatment was superior to topical corticosteroids (adjusted risk difference 10.9%, 95% confidence interval 1.0% to 20.9%; p = 0.032; number needed to treat = 10). Narrowband ultraviolet B light was not superior to topical corticosteroids (adjusted risk difference 5.2%, 95% confidence interval -4.4% to 14.9%; p = 0.290; number needed to treat = 19). The secondary outcomes supported the primary analysis. Quality of life did not differ between the groups. Participants who adhered to the interventions for > 75% of the expected treatment protocol were more likely to achieve treatment success. Over 40% of participants had lost treatment response after 1 year with no treatment. Grade 3 or 4 erythema was experienced by 62 participants (12%) (three of whom were using the dummy) and transient skin thinning by 13 participants (2.5%) (two of whom were using the placebo). We observed no serious adverse treatment effects. For combination treatment compared with topical corticosteroids, the unadjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £2328.56 (adjusted £1932) per additional successful treatment (from an NHS perspective).

LIMITATIONS

Relatively high loss to follow-up limits the interpretation of the trial findings, especially during the post-intervention follow-up phase.

CONCLUSION

Hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light plus topical corticosteroid combination treatment is superior to topical corticosteroids alone for treatment of localised vitiligo. Combination treatment was relatively safe and well tolerated, but was effective in around one-quarter of participants only. Whether or not combination treatment is cost-effective depends on how much decision-makers are willing to pay for the benefits observed.

FUTURE WORK

Development and testing of new vitiligo treatments with a greater treatment response and longer-lasting effects are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17160087.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Prescribing Home Narrowband UVB Phototherapy: A Review of Current Approaches

Conventional, full-body phototherapy equipment is costly and therefore patients are usually treated in dermatology centres. Such office-based therapy is often not feasible for those patients who live far away from a phototherapy centre due to lost time and wages, inability to travel because of extensive skin disease, or prohibitive travel costs. Home phototherapy has emerged as a modality that meets the needs of those patients. Our aim was to review available studies on UV sources, treatment protocols, efficacy, and safety of home phototherapy. A literature review was conducted on PubMed using the terms "home" AND "phototherapy" AND ("guide" OR "approach" OR "review" OR "protocol"). From the data extracted, narrowband UVB (311 nm) offers the best balance between safety and efficacy and is recommended for home phototherapy by most authors. Treatment is safe and possible adverse effects are related to overexposure (erythema, blistering). The usual treatment protocol was administering treatments on alternating days, including weekends, with dosing based on the patient's Fitzpatrick skin type. We also provide information on the available home phototherapy systems in Canada and their reimbursement. Home phototherapy is underused in Canada. Narrowband UVB phototherapy sources equipped with a 3-dimensional panel provides a practical and safe option.

Narrowband ultraviolet B treatment for psoriasis is highly economical and causes significant savings in cost for topical treatments

BACKGROUND

Narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) treatment for psoriasis is considered expensive. However, existing data are based on estimates and do not consider indirect cost savings.

OBJECTIVES

To define the actual costs of NB-UVB incurred by the service provider, as well as treatment-associated cost savings.

METHODS

We performed data linkage of (i) comprehensive treatment records and (ii) prescribing data for all NB-UVB treatment episodes spanning 6 years in a population of 420 000. We minimized data fluctuation by compiling data from four independent treatment sites, and using drug prescriptions unrelated to psoriasis as a negative control.

RESULTS

National Health Service Tayside spent an average of £257 per NB-UVB treatment course (mean 257 ± 63, range 150-286, across four independent treatment sites), contrasting sharply with the estimate of £1882 used by the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The cost of topical treatments averaged £128 per patient in the 12 months prior to NB-UVB, accounting for 42% of the overall drug costs incurred by these patients. This was reduced by 40% to £53 per patient over the 12-month period following NB-UVB treatment, while psoriasis-unrelated drug prescription remained unchanged, suggesting disease-specific effects of NB-UVB. The data were not due to site-specific factors, as confirmed by highly similar results observed between treatment sites operated by distinct staff. Finally, we detail all staff hours directly and indirectly involved in treatment, allowing direct translation of cost into other healthcare systems.

CONCLUSIONS

NB-UVB is a low-cost treatment; cost figures currently used in health technology appraisals are an overestimate based on the data presented here. Creating or extending access to NB-UVB is likely to offer additional savings by delaying or avoiding costly third-line treatments for many patients.