Acute Radiation Dermatitis Evaluation with Reflectance Confocal Microscopy: A Prospective Study.
acute radiation dermatitis
breast cancer
reflectance confocal microscopy
Journal
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-4418
Titre abrégé: Diagnostics (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101658402
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Sep 2021
13 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
20
07
2021
revised:
17
08
2021
accepted:
07
09
2021
entrez:
28
9
2021
pubmed:
29
9
2021
medline:
29
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
During radiotherapy (RT), most breast cancer patients experience ionizing radiation (IR)-induced skin injury-acute radiation dermatitis (ARD). The severity of ARD is determined by a physician according to CTCAE or RTOG scales, which are subjective. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a noninvasive skin imaging technique offering cellular resolution. Digital dermoscopy (DD) performed in conjugation with RCM can provide more information regarding skin toxicity. The purpose of this study is to create an RCM and DD features-based ARD assessment scale, to assess the association with CTCAE scale and possible predictive value. One hundred and three breast cancer patients during RT were recruited; every week, clinical symptoms of ARD (CTCAE scale) were evaluated and RCM, together with digital dermoscopy (DD), was performed. According to RCM; after 2 RT weeks, exocytosis and/or spongiosis were present in 94% of patients; after 3 weeks, mild contrast cells (MMCs) were detected in 45%; disarrayed epidermis (DE) was present in 66% of patients after 4 weeks and in 93% after 5 weeks; abnormal dermal papillae (ADP) were present in 68% of patients after 5 weeks. The coefficients of RCM features (RCM RCM features of irradiated skin appear earlier than clinical symptoms, have a characteristic course, and allow the severity of ARD to be predicted.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
During radiotherapy (RT), most breast cancer patients experience ionizing radiation (IR)-induced skin injury-acute radiation dermatitis (ARD). The severity of ARD is determined by a physician according to CTCAE or RTOG scales, which are subjective. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a noninvasive skin imaging technique offering cellular resolution. Digital dermoscopy (DD) performed in conjugation with RCM can provide more information regarding skin toxicity. The purpose of this study is to create an RCM and DD features-based ARD assessment scale, to assess the association with CTCAE scale and possible predictive value.
METHODS
METHODS
One hundred and three breast cancer patients during RT were recruited; every week, clinical symptoms of ARD (CTCAE scale) were evaluated and RCM, together with digital dermoscopy (DD), was performed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
According to RCM; after 2 RT weeks, exocytosis and/or spongiosis were present in 94% of patients; after 3 weeks, mild contrast cells (MMCs) were detected in 45%; disarrayed epidermis (DE) was present in 66% of patients after 4 weeks and in 93% after 5 weeks; abnormal dermal papillae (ADP) were present in 68% of patients after 5 weeks. The coefficients of RCM features (RCM
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
RCM features of irradiated skin appear earlier than clinical symptoms, have a characteristic course, and allow the severity of ARD to be predicted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34574012
pii: diagnostics11091670
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11091670
pmc: PMC8471711
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Int Wound J. 2005 Jun;2(2):112-27
pubmed: 16722862
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2019 May;19(5):413-421
pubmed: 30869538
Eur J Dermatol. 2016 Dec 1;26(6):549-565
pubmed: 28007674
Exp Dermatol. 2014 Jun;23(6):414-8
pubmed: 24750486
J Invest Dermatol. 2012 Mar;132(3 Pt 2):985-93
pubmed: 22217743
Exp Ther Med. 2019 Feb;17(2):1004-1011
pubmed: 30679966
Front Med (Lausanne). 2019 Nov 22;6:274
pubmed: 31824956
Lasers Surg Med. 2021 Aug;53(6):776-797
pubmed: 33527483
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2018 Dec 1;182(1):93-97
pubmed: 30137559
Br J Dermatol. 2015;172(5):1222-48
pubmed: 25355622
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021 Jun;84(6):1575-1584
pubmed: 32827607
J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2021 May;19(5):768-770
pubmed: 33569903
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2013 Sep;27(9):1143-50
pubmed: 22882643
Health Technol Assess. 2016 Jul;20(58):1-260
pubmed: 27483991
Dermatol Surg. 2010 Feb;36(2):177-84
pubmed: 20039914
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 May;48(5):727-34
pubmed: 12734502
Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2016 Oct;107(8):631-9
pubmed: 26996333
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Nov 15;72(4):1031-40
pubmed: 18440727
J Cutan Pathol. 2020 Mar;47(3):295-304
pubmed: 31618473
Dermatology. 2010;220(1):15-24
pubmed: 19907131
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020 Jan;34(1):74-81
pubmed: 31325402
Clin Breast Cancer. 2018 Oct;18(5):e825-e840
pubmed: 30072193
Sci Rep. 2016 Jan 12;6:19216
pubmed: 26755422
J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1993 Jun;19(6):564-70
pubmed: 8509518
G Ital Dermatol Venereol. 2015 Oct;150(5):565-73
pubmed: 26333554
Dermatol Clin. 2016 Oct;34(4):505-512
pubmed: 27692456
Int J Dermatol. 2019 Dec;58(12):1382-1387
pubmed: 31286498
Arch Surg. 1992 Mar;127(3):321-4
pubmed: 1550480
Acta Dermatovenerol Croat. 2018 Apr;26(1):64-67
pubmed: 29782304
Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2017 May 05;9:313-323
pubmed: 28503074
Nephron Exp Nephrol. 2006;103(2):e33-40
pubmed: 16543762
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Apr;162(3):409-417
pubmed: 28160158
Oncol Lett. 2019 May;17(5):4102-4111
pubmed: 30944603
Dermatology. 2013;227(2):171-4
pubmed: 24080762
Nat Biotechnol. 2003 Nov;21(11):1361-7
pubmed: 14595364
Biomed Opt Express. 2020 Apr 20;11(5):2652-2664
pubmed: 32499950
Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2017 Jul;26(3):371-382
pubmed: 28576177
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2016 Aug;30(8):1295-302
pubmed: 27230832
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020 Oct;34(10):2268-2279
pubmed: 31997465
J Med Life. 2011 Jan-Mar;4(1):63-74
pubmed: 21505576
Br J Dermatol. 2015 Jul;173(1):128-33
pubmed: 25413382
J Clin Med. 2019 Sep 13;8(9):
pubmed: 31540342