Long-Term Efficacy of Photodynamic Therapy with Fractionated 5-Aminolevulinic Acid 20% versus Conventional Two-Stage Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate for Superficial Basal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a noninvasive treatment for patients with superficial basal-cell carcinoma (sBCC). The efficacy of PDT may vary with different photosensitizers and treatment schedules. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate whether fractionated 5-aminolevulinic acid 20% (ALA)-PDT is superior to conventional two-stage methyl aminolevulinate (MAL)-PDT for sBCC. METHODS: We present the 5 years results of a single-blind, randomized, multicenter trial. 162 patients with a histologically confirmed primary sBCC were randomized to fractionated ALA-PDT or MAL-PDT. RESULTS: The 5-year tumor-free survival rate was 70.7% (95% CI 58.2-80.1%) for ALA-PDT and 76.5% (95% CI 64.4-85.0%) for MAL-PDT. In the first 3 years, there was no significant difference in risk of treatment failure (HR = 1.53, p = 0.283), but in the long-term, the risk of recurrence was significantly lower following MAL-PDT compared to ALA-PDT (HR = 0.125, p = 0.049). As judged by patients, the esthetic result was good-excellent in 96.8% (61/63) and 94.4% (56/59) of patients treated with ALA-PDT and MAL-PDT, respectively (p = 0.631). CONCLUSION: The long-term efficacy is significantly higher for conventional two-stage MAL-PDT than for fractionated ALA-PDT, whereas there was no significant difference in esthetic outcome between the treatments at 5 years after treatment. These results indicate that fractionated ALA-PDT offers no benefit over conventional two-stage MAL-PDT.

Single versus Multiple Level Sectioning for the Subtyping of Basal-Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The histological subtype of basal-cell carcinoma (BCC) is often based on a punch biopsy; only a small part is evaluated, possibly leading to misclassification. Consensus on the optimal approach to process punch biopsies is lacking, though accurate subtyping is important for appropriate treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to investigate whether evaluating 4 levels of a punch biopsy instead of 1 or 2 levels leads to more accurate subtyping of BCC. METHODS: In a retrospective study we evaluated 87 punch biopsies of histologically confirmed BCCs. The primary outcome was the proportion of "more aggressive" BCCs (nonsuperficial vs. superficial, infiltrative vs. nodular subtype) that was missed by evaluation on 1 or 2 levels, using 4-level diagnosis as reference standard. RESULTS: Eighty-five cases were available for analysis. Subtyping based on 1 level resulted in discrepancies with 4-level diagnosis in 16.5% of all cases. Underdiagnosis occurred in 14 of 58 nonsuperficial BCCs (24.1%, 95% CI: 13.9-37.2). Seven of 38 nodular BCCs (18.4%, 95% CI: 7.74-34.3) were diagnosed as superficial in 1 level, and 7 of 20 infiltrative BCCs (35%, 95% CI: 15.4-59.2) were diagnosed as superficial (n = 2) or nodular (n = 5) in 1 level. CONCLUSION: In order to maximize correct subtyping and plan appropriate treatment, we advise to evaluate at least 2, but preferably more, levels of a punch biopsy to determine the BCC subtype.

Histologic subtype of treatment failures after noninvasive therapy for superficial basal cell carcinoma: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: There have been concerns that recurrences after noninvasive therapy for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) transform into a "more aggressive" histologic subtype. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the proportion of patients with a nonsuperficial treatment failure after noninvasive therapy for superficial BCC. METHODS: An observational study was performed using data from a single blind, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial (March 2008-August 2010) with 5-year follow-up in patients with primary superficial BCC treated with methylaminolevulinate-photodynamic therapy, 5-fluorouracil, or imiquimod. Data were used from 166 adults with a histologically confirmed treatment failure. RESULTS: A nonsuperficial subtype was found in 64 of 166 treatment failures (38.6%). Proportions with a more aggressive subtype than the primary tumor were 51.3% (38/74) for early and 28.3% (26/92) for later treatment failures (P = .003). The proportion of more aggressive early failures was significantly lower after imiquimod (26.3%) compared with methylaminolevulinate-photodynamic therapy (54.8%, P = .086) and 5-fluorouracil (66.7%, P = .011). LIMITATIONS: There was limited information on the exact time of occurrence of treatment failures. CONCLUSION: More aggressive treatment failure recurrences after noninvasive therapy for superficial BCC occur most often within the first 3 months posttreatment, probably indicating underdiagnosis of more aggressive components in the primary tumor rather than transformation.

Effectiveness of a patient decision aid for patients with superficial basal cell carcinoma: A pre- and post-implementation study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates whether using a patient decision aid (PDA) for patients with superficial basal-cell carcinoma (sBCC) results in a decreased decisional conflict level and increased knowledge. METHODS: In a prospective multicentre study, patient groups were included before and after implementation of a PDA. Decisional conflict levels were compared directly after making the treatment decision, measured once as the mean score on the decisional conflict scale (DCS). Higher scores correspond with higher conflict levels (0-100). Secondary outcomes were knowledge on treatment options, recognizing a BCC, and risk factors for developing a BCC measured on an adapted version of a validated knowledge questionnaire for melanoma patients, and patient satisfaction with the PDA. RESULTS: Data was available for 103 patients in the control-group and 109 in the PDA-group. The mean DCS score in the control-group was 22.78 (SD 14.76) compared to 22.34 (SD 14.54) in the PDA-group; the decrease was non-significant (p = 0.828). The average percentage correct answers on the knowledge questionnaire increased from 76.5% in the control-group to 80.5% in the PDA-group (p = 0.044). According to the majority of patients in the PDA-group (73.7%) the PDA had added value. CONCLUSION: Using the PDA had no significant effect on decisional conflict levels, but increased overall knowledge on relevant issues concerning sBCC. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The PDA can be used as an informational tool by patients with sBCC.