Translation and Validation of the Dutch Version of the Sun Exposure and Protection Index.

INTRODUCTION: Skin cancer is currently the most common cancer type worldwide, and numbers are rapidly increasing. To improve primary prevention, individualised prevention strategies may be of interest as this enhances the chance of long-term behavioural change. The Sun Exposure and Protection Index (SEPI), previously validated in multiple languages, is a tool that could help identify individuals with risky behaviour and tailor interventions to the person's propensity to change. The aim of the present study was to investigate the reliability and validity of a Dutch version of the SEPI for both usage in daily clinical practice and research. METHODS: Patients were included at primary care settings and dermatology outpatient settings in a 1:1 ratio. Participants were asked to fill out the SEPI together with some baseline characteristics and the previously validated FACE-Q Skin Cancer - Sun Protection module. Construct validity was tested by comparing SEPI part I and the FACE-Q module using Spearman's Rho. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's Alpha for both SEPI parts separately. To assess test-retest reliability, the SEPI was again filled out 3 weeks later, and scores were compared with Cohen's weighted Kappa. RESULTS: Of the 171 participants completing the first questionnaire, 147 (86.0%) participants also completed the follow-up questionnaire. Comparison between the corresponding SEPI part I and FACE-Q module questions showed good correlations regarding sun exposure habits (correlation coefficients ranging from 0.61 to 0.85). Internal consistency of SEPI part I was 0.63 and SEPI part II was 0.65. The test-retest analysis indicated reproducibility over time (weighted Kappa ranging from 0.38 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the Dutch version of the SEPI is shown to be a valid and reliable tool for both usages in daily clinical practice and research to evaluate individual ultraviolet exposure and measure a person's propensity to limit it.

Diagnosis of Basal Cell Carcinoma by Reflectance Confocal Microscopy: Study Design and Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial.

BACKGROUND: Skin cancer, including basal cell carcinoma (BCC), has become a major health care problem. The limitations of a punch biopsy (at present the gold standard) as diagnostic method together with the increasing incidence of skin cancer point out the need for more accurate, cost-effective, and patient friendly diagnostic tools. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a noninvasive imaging technique that has great potential for skin cancer diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether in vivo RCM can correctly identify the subtype of BCC and to determine the cost-effectiveness of RCM compared with punch biopsy (usual care). STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled multicenter trial. METHODS: On the basis of 80% power and an alpha of 0.05, 329 patients with lesions clinically suspicious for BCC will be included in this study. Patients will be randomized for RCM or for a punch biopsy (usual care). When a BCC is diagnosed, surgical excision will follow and a follow-up visit will be planned 3 months later. Several questionnaires will be filled in (EQ-5D, EQ-5D VAS, iMTA PCQ, and TSQM-9). We will perform statistical analysis, cost-effectiveness, and patient outcome analysis after data collection. RESULTS: This research started in January 2016 and is ethically approved. We expect to finish this study at the end of 2018. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we will investigate whether RCM is at least as good in identifying BCC subtypes as conventional pathological investigation of skin biopsies. Anticipating that RCM is found to be a cost-effective alternative, it saves on direct medical consumption like labor of the pathologist and other medical personnel as well as materials related to treatment failure with at least equal effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02623101; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02623101 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6id54WQa2).

Real-life Data on Patient Characteristics, Cost and Effectiveness of Field-directed Treatment for Actinic Keratoses: An Observational Study.

Actinic keratoses (AK) occur frequently; however, real-life clinical data on personalized treatment choice and costs are scarce. This multicentre one-year observational study investigated patient-characteristics, cost and effectiveness of methylaminolaevulinate photodynamic therapy (MAL-PDT), imiquimod (IMI) and 5-fluorour-acil (5-FU) in patients with AKs on the face/scalp. A total of 104 patients preferred MAL-PDT, 106 preferred IMI and 110 preferred 5-FU. At baseline, significant differences between treatment groups were found; most patients were severely affected (mean 32.5 AK in PDT-group, 20.2 in IMI-group, 22.8 in 5-FU-group). A mean reduction in lesions of 81% after MAL-PDT, 82% after IMI and 88% after 5-FU was found after one year. Annual costs were €1,950 for MAL-PDT, €877 for IMI and €738 for 5-FU. These results show that, compared with clinical trials, in the real-life clinical setting AK patients are usually more severely affected and treatment costs are much higher. Furthermore, patient characteristics are important factors in treatment choice.

No increased risk of cancer after coal tar treatment in patients with psoriasis or eczema.

Coal tar is an effective treatment for psoriasis and eczema, but it contains several carcinogenic compounds. Occupational and animal studies have shown an increased risk of cancer after exposure to coal tar. Many dermatologists have abandoned this treatment for safety reasons, although the risk of cancer after coal tar in dermatological practice is unclear. This large cohort study included 13,200 patients with psoriasis and eczema. Information on skin disease and treatment, risk factors, and cancer occurrence was retrieved from medical files, questionnaires, and medical registries. Proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate differences in cancer risk by treatment modality. Patients treated with coal tar were compared with a reference category of patients treated with dermatocorticosteroids (assumed to carry no increased cancer risk). The median exposure to coal tar ointments was 6 months (range 1-300 months). Coal tar did not increase the risk of non-skin malignancies (hazard ratio (HR) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.09), or the risk of skin cancer (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.69-1.72). This study has sufficient power to show that coal tar treatment is not associated with an increased risk of cancer. These results indicate that coal tar can be maintained as a safe treatment in dermatological practice.