The conventional protocol vs. a protocol including illumination with a fabric-based biophotonic device (the Phosistos protocol) in photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: a randomized, controlled, noninferiority clinical study.
Journal
The British journal of dermatology
ISSN: 1365-2133
Titre abrégé: Br J Dermatol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0004041
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2020
01 2020
Historique:
accepted:
24
04
2019
pubmed:
26
4
2019
medline:
15
5
2021
entrez:
26
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) using methyl aminolaevulinate is a noninvasive treatment option suitable to treat clinical and subclinical actinic keratosis (AK) over a large area (field cancerization). The most widely used, conventional protocol in Europe includes illumination with a red-light lamp. This illumination commonly causes pain, and patients often cannot complete the treatment. The aims of this paper are twofold. The first aim is to introduce a novel protocol, the Phosistos protocol (P-PDT), which includes illumination with a fabric-based biophotonic device. The second and major aim is to assess the noninferiority, in terms of efficacy for PDT of AK, of P-PDT compared with the conventional protocol (C-PDT). A randomized, controlled, multicentre, intraindividual clinical study was conducted. Forty-six patients with grade I-II AK of the forehead and scalp were treated with P-PDT on one area (280 AK lesions) and with C-PDT on the contralateral area (280 AK lesions). The primary end point was the lesion complete response (CR) rate at 3 months, with an absolute noninferiority margin of -10%. Secondary end points included pain scores, incidence of adverse effects and cosmetic outcome. Three months following treatment, the lesion CR rate of P-PDT was noninferior to that of C-PDT (79·3% vs. 80·7%, respectively; absolute difference -1·6%; one-sided 95% confidence interval -4·5% to infinity). The noninferiority of P-PDT to C-PDT in terms of the lesion CR rate remained at the 6-month follow-up (94·2% vs. 94·9%, respectively; absolute difference -0·6%; one-sided 95% confidence interval -2·7% to infinity). Moreover, the pain score at the end of illumination was significantly lower for P-PDT than for C-PDT (mean ± SD 0·3 ± 0·6 vs. 7·4 ± 2·3; P < 0·001). P-PDT is noninferior to C-PDT in terms of efficacy for treating AK of the forehead and scalp and resulted in much lower pain scores and fewer adverse effects. What's already known about this topic? Topical photodynamic therapy using methyl aminolaevulinate is effective for treating actinic keratosis. In Europe, the conventional protocol involves illumination with a red-light lamp. Unfortunately, pain is often experienced by patients undergoing this protocol. An alternative protocol that uses daylight illumination has recently been shown to be as effective as the conventional protocol while being nearly painless. However, this alternative protocol can be conducted only in suitable weather conditions. What does this study add? The Phosistos protocol is demonstrated to be as effective as the conventional protocol, nearly as painless as the daylight protocols and suitable year round for treatment of actinic keratosis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) using methyl aminolaevulinate is a noninvasive treatment option suitable to treat clinical and subclinical actinic keratosis (AK) over a large area (field cancerization). The most widely used, conventional protocol in Europe includes illumination with a red-light lamp. This illumination commonly causes pain, and patients often cannot complete the treatment.
OBJECTIVES
The aims of this paper are twofold. The first aim is to introduce a novel protocol, the Phosistos protocol (P-PDT), which includes illumination with a fabric-based biophotonic device. The second and major aim is to assess the noninferiority, in terms of efficacy for PDT of AK, of P-PDT compared with the conventional protocol (C-PDT).
METHODS
A randomized, controlled, multicentre, intraindividual clinical study was conducted. Forty-six patients with grade I-II AK of the forehead and scalp were treated with P-PDT on one area (280 AK lesions) and with C-PDT on the contralateral area (280 AK lesions). The primary end point was the lesion complete response (CR) rate at 3 months, with an absolute noninferiority margin of -10%. Secondary end points included pain scores, incidence of adverse effects and cosmetic outcome.
RESULTS
Three months following treatment, the lesion CR rate of P-PDT was noninferior to that of C-PDT (79·3% vs. 80·7%, respectively; absolute difference -1·6%; one-sided 95% confidence interval -4·5% to infinity). The noninferiority of P-PDT to C-PDT in terms of the lesion CR rate remained at the 6-month follow-up (94·2% vs. 94·9%, respectively; absolute difference -0·6%; one-sided 95% confidence interval -2·7% to infinity). Moreover, the pain score at the end of illumination was significantly lower for P-PDT than for C-PDT (mean ± SD 0·3 ± 0·6 vs. 7·4 ± 2·3; P < 0·001).
CONCLUSIONS
P-PDT is noninferior to C-PDT in terms of efficacy for treating AK of the forehead and scalp and resulted in much lower pain scores and fewer adverse effects. What's already known about this topic? Topical photodynamic therapy using methyl aminolaevulinate is effective for treating actinic keratosis. In Europe, the conventional protocol involves illumination with a red-light lamp. Unfortunately, pain is often experienced by patients undergoing this protocol. An alternative protocol that uses daylight illumination has recently been shown to be as effective as the conventional protocol while being nearly painless. However, this alternative protocol can be conducted only in suitable weather conditions. What does this study add? The Phosistos protocol is demonstrated to be as effective as the conventional protocol, nearly as painless as the daylight protocols and suitable year round for treatment of actinic keratosis.
Substances chimiques
Photosensitizing Agents
0
Aminolevulinic Acid
88755TAZ87
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
76-84Subventions
Organisme : FP7 Health
ID : CIP-ICT-PSP-2013-7-621103
Pays : International
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.
Références
Szeimies RM, Torezan L, Niwa A et al. Clinical, histopathological and immunohistochemical assessment of human skin field cancerization before and after photodynamic therapy. Br J Dermatol 2012; 167:150-9.
Braathen LR, Morton CA, Basset-Seguin N et al. Photodynamic therapy for skin field cancerization: an international consensus. International Society for Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2012; 26:1063-6.
Morton C, Szeimies RM, Sidoroff A et al. European Dermatology Forum Guidelines on topical photodynamic therapy. Eur J Dermatol 2015; 25:296-311.
Morton C, Campbell S, Gupta G et al. Intraindividual, right-left comparison of topical methyl aminolaevulinate-photodynamic therapy and cryotherapy in subjects with actinic keratoses: a multicentre, randomized controlled study. Br J Dermatol 2006; 155:1029-36.
Pariser D, Loss R, Jarratt M et al. Topical methyl-aminolevulinate photodynamic therapy using red light-emitting diode light for treatment of multiple actinic keratoses: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008; 59:569-76.
Szeimies RM, Matheson RT, Davis SA et al. Topical methyl aminolevulinate photodynamic therapy using red light-emitting diode light for multiple actinic keratoses: a randomized study. Dermatol Surg 2009; 35:586-92.
Wiegell SR, Haedersdal M, Philipsen PA et al. Continuous activation of PpIX by daylight is as effective as and less painful than conventional photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses; a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study. Br J Dermatol 2008; 158:740-6.
Rubel DM, Spelman L, Murrell DF et al. Daylight photodynamic therapy with methyl aminolevulinate cream as a convenient, similarly effective, nearly painless alternative to conventional photodynamic therapy in actinic keratosis treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Dermatol 2014; 171:1164-71.
Wiegell SR, Wulf HC, Szeimies RM et al. Daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: an international consensus: International Society for Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2012; 26:673-9.
Neittaanmaki-Perttu N, Karppinen TT, Gronroos M et al. Daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses: a randomized double-blinded nonsponsored prospective study comparing 5-aminolaevulinic acid nanoemulsion (BF-200) with methyl-5-aminolaevulinate. Br J Dermatol 2014; 171:1172-80.
O'Gorman SM, Clowry J, Manley M et al. Artificial white light versus daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol 2016; 152:638-44.
Wiegell SR, Fabricius S, Heydenreich J et al. Weather conditions and daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy: protoporphyrin IX-weighted daylight doses measured in six geographical locations. Br J Dermatol 2013; 168:186-91.
Kellner C, Bauriedl S, Hollstein S et al. Simulated-daylight photodynamic therapy with BF-200 aminolaevulinic acid for actinic keratosis: assessment of the efficacy and tolerability in a retrospective study. Br J Dermatol 2015; 172:1146-8.
Kessels JP, Nelemans PJ, Mosterd K et al. Laser-mediated photodynamic therapy: an alternative treatment for actinic keratosis? Acta Derm Venereol 2016; 96:351-4.
Lerche CM, Heerfordt IM, Heydenreich J et al. Alternatives to outdoor daylight illumination for photodynamic therapy - use of greenhouses and artificial light sources. Int J Mol Sci 2016; 17:309.
Vicentini C, Vignion-Dewalle AS, Thecua E et al. Photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis of the forehead and scalp: a randomized, controlled, phase II clinical study evaluating the noninferiority of a new protocol involving irradiation with a light-emitting, fabric-based device (the Flexitheralight protocol) compared with the conventional protocol involving irradiation with the Aktilite CL 128 lamp. Br J Dermatol 2019; 180:765-73.
Olsen EA, Abernethy ML, Kulp-Shorten C et al. A double-blind, vehicle-controlled study evaluating masoprocol cream in the treatment of actinic keratoses on the head and neck. J Am Acad Dermatol 1991; 24:738-43.
Mordon S, Cochrane C, Tylcz JB et al. Light emitting fabric technologies for photodynamic therapy. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther 2015; 12:1-8.
Enk CD, Levi A. Low-irradiance red LED traffic lamps as light source in PDT for actinic keratoses. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2012; 28:332-4.
Langmack K, Mehta R, Twyman P et al. Topical photodynamic therapy at low fluence rates - theory and practice. J Photochem Photobiol B 2001; 60:37-43.
Apalla Z, Sotiriou E, Panagiotidou D et al. The impact of different fluence rates on pain and clinical outcome in patients with actinic keratoses treated with photodynamic therapy. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2011; 27:181-5.
Jetter N, Chandan N, Wang S, Tsoukas M. Field cancerization therapies for management of actinic keratosis: a narrative review. Am J Clin Dermatol 2018; 19:543-57.
Serra-Guillen C, Hueso L, Nagore E et al. Comparative study between cold air analgesia and supraorbital and supratrochlear nerve block for the management of pain during photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses of the frontotemporal zone. Br J Dermatol 2009; 161:353-6.
Halldin CB, Paoli J, Sandberg C et al. Nerve blocks enable adequate pain relief during topical photodynamic therapy of field cancerization on the forehead and scalp. Br J Dermatol 2009; 160:795-800.
Stangeland KZ, Kroon S. Cold air analgesia as pain reduction during photodynamic therapy of actinic keratoses. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2012; 26:849-54.
Wiegell SR, Fabricius S, Gniadecka M et al. Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy of moderate to thick actinic keratoses of the face and scalp: a randomized multicentre study. Br J Dermatol 2012; 166:1327-32.
Wiegell SR, Fabricius S, Stender IM et al. A randomized, multicentre study of directed daylight exposure times of 1.5 vs. 2.5 h in daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy with methyl aminolaevulinate in patients with multiple thin actinic keratoses of the face and scalp. Br J Dermatol 2011; 164:1083-90.
Wiegell SR, Haedersdal M, Eriksen P et al. Photodynamic therapy of actinic keratoses with 8% and 16% methyl aminolaevulinate and home-based daylight exposure: a double-blinded randomized clinical trial. Br J Dermatol 2009; 160:1308-14.
Moseley H. Light distribution and calibration of commercial PDT LED arrays. Photochem Photobiol Sci 2005; 4:911-14.
Vicentini C, Vignion-Dewalle AS, Thecua E et al. Photodynamic therapy of actinic keratosis with the Aktilite CL128: irradiance distribution and impact of light dose on the treatment efficacy. Presented at the European Society for Photodynamic Therapy (Euro-PDT) Annual Congress 2018, Nice, France, 16-17 March 2018; abstr. C46.
Vicentini C, Vignion-Dewalle AS, Thecua E et al. Photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis of the forehead and scalp with the Aktilite CL 128: is there a cut-off value for PpIX-weighted irradiance for effective treatment? Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2019; 35:232-7.
CORDIS. Development of biophotonic device based on flexible light emitting textile dedicated to the monitoring and treatment for dermatologic diseases and carcinoma. Available at: https://cordis.seuropa.eu/project/rcn/191777/factsheet/en (last accessed 11 June 2019).