Testing the feasibility of augmented digital skin imaging to objectively compare the efficacy of topical treatments for radiodermatitis.
Administration, Topical
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Breast
/ diagnostic imaging
Breast Neoplasms
/ radiotherapy
Feasibility Studies
Female
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
/ methods
Middle Aged
Radiodermatitis
/ classification
Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
/ adverse effects
Retrospective Studies
Skin
/ diagnostic imaging
Treatment Outcome
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
09
11
2018
accepted:
23
05
2019
entrez:
11
6
2019
pubmed:
11
6
2019
medline:
10
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Radiation-induced dermatitis (RID) is routinely graded by visual inspection. Inter-observer variability makes this approach inadequate for an objective assessment of the efficacy of different topical treatments. In this study we report on the first clinical application of a new image-analysis tool developed to measure the relevant effects quantitatively and to compare the effects of two different topical preparations used to treat RID. After completion of radiotherapy, RID was retrospectively assessed in 100 white female breast cancer patients who had received adjuvant breast irradiation. Of these patients, 34 were treated with R1&R2, a Lactokine-fluid derived from milk proteins, and 66 were treated with Bepanthen. In addition RID was graded independently by two experienced radiation oncologists in accordance with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). For quantitative evaluation, the irradiated breast and the non-irradiated contralateral breast were photographed in a standardized manner including a color reference card. For analysis, all images were converted into the color space L*a*b* and mean values were calculated for each of the color parameters. The CTCAE-based grading revealed statistically significant inter-observer variability in the scoring of RID Grades 1, 2 and 3 (p<0.001). A difference between the two topical products could not be observed with visual inspection. By using augmented image analysis methods a statistically significant increase in a*-values (mean 4.15; 95%CI: 5.97-2.33, p<0.001) in patients treated with R1&R2 indicated more intense reddening. Digital subtraction was used to eliminate differences in individual baseline skin tone to generate a new, low-scatter parameter (ΔSEV). Visual CTCAE-based evaluation of RID was not suitable for assessing the efficacy of the skin treatment products. In contrast, the novel image analysis enabled a quantitative evaluation independent of skin type and baseline skin tone in our cohort suggesting that augmented image analysis may be a suitable tool for this type of investigation. Prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31181091
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218018
pii: PONE-D-18-32338
pmc: PMC6557505
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0218018Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J Med Invest. 1998 Feb;44(3-4):121-6
pubmed: 9597799
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 15;81(4):1098-104
pubmed: 20932653
Strahlenther Onkol. 2010 Nov;186(11):621-9
pubmed: 21072624
Strahlenther Onkol. 2005 Jun;181(6):392-5
pubmed: 15925982
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Mar 30;31(5):1341-6
pubmed: 7713792
Arch Dermatol. 1988 Jun;124(6):869-71
pubmed: 3377516
J Vis Exp. 2016 May 27;(111):
pubmed: 27284926
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2017 May 18;4:15-23
pubmed: 29594203
Int J Cosmet Sci. 1991 Aug;13(4):191-208
pubmed: 19291061
Br J Radiol. 1952 Jun;25(294):326-35
pubmed: 14925315
Semin Oncol Nurs. 2006 Aug;22(3):163-73
pubmed: 16893745
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;236:363-374
pubmed: 28508819