Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 50
Filtrar
1.
Hered Cancer Clin Pract ; 22(1): 7, 2024 May 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38741145

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: It has not been clearly established if skin cancer or melanoma are manifestations of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carrier status. Estimating the risk of skin cancer is an important step towards developing screening recommendations. METHODS: We report the findings of a prospective cohort study of 6,207 women from North America who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Women were followed from the date of baseline questionnaire to the diagnosis of skin cancer, to age 80 years, death from any cause, or the date of last follow-up. RESULTS: During the mean follow-up period of eight years, 3.7% of women with a BRCA1 mutation (133 of 3,623) and 3.8% of women with a BRCA2 mutation (99 of 2,584) reported a diagnosis of skin cancer (including both keratinocyte carcinomas and melanoma). The cumulative risk of all types of skin cancer from age 20 to 80 years was 14.1% for BRCA1 carriers and 10.7% for BRCA2 carriers. The cumulative risk of melanoma was 2.5% for BRCA1 carriers and 2.3% for BRCA2 carriers, compared to 1.5% for women in the general population in the United States. The strongest risk factor for skin cancer was a prior diagnosis of skin cancer. CONCLUSION: The risk of non-melanoma skin cancer in women who carry a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 is similar to that of non-carrier women. The risk of melanoma appears to be slightly elevated. We suggest that a referral to a dermatologist or primary care provider for BRCA mutation carriers for annual skin examination and counselling regarding limiting UV exposure, the use of sunscreen and recognizing the early signs of melanoma might be warranted, but further studies are necessary.

3.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 90(6): 1161-1169, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38368952

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend that patients with melanoma undergo dermatologic examination at least annually. Adherence to follow-up and its impact on survival are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of adherence to annual dermatologic follow-up in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma, identify predictors for better adherence, and evaluate whether adherence was associated with melanoma-related mortality. METHODS: Retrospective inception cohort analysis of adults with primary invasive melanoma in Ontario, Canada from 2010 to 2013 with follow-up until December 31, 2018. RESULTS: Adherence to dermatologic follow-up was variable with only 28.0% of patients seeing a dermatologist at least annually (median follow-up 5.0 years). Younger age, female sex, higher income, greater access to dermatology care, stage 2/3 melanoma, prior keratinocyte carcinoma, fewer comorbidities, and any outpatient visit in the 12 months prior to melanoma diagnosis were predictors for adherence. Greater adherence to annual dermatology visits was associated with reduced melanoma-specific mortality compared with lower levels of adherence (adjusted hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78). LIMITATIONS: Observational study design and inability to identify skin examinations performed by non-dermatologists. CONCLUSION: Adherence to annual dermatology visits after melanoma diagnosis was low. Greater adherence may promote better patient survival but warrants confirmation in further research including randomized trials.


Assuntos
Dermatologia , Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Humanos , Melanoma/mortalidade , Melanoma/terapia , Feminino , Masculino , Neoplasias Cutâneas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Cutâneas/patologia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/terapia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso , Ontário/epidemiologia , Adulto , Dermatologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Seguimentos , Cooperação do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Estudos de Coortes , Taxa de Sobrevida , Fatores Etários
5.
Pediatr Transplant ; 28(1): e14618, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37786978

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is a well-documented risk of secondary cutaneous malignancies following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), but data on risk in pediatric populations are limited. The objective of this study is to perform a systematic review of reported features and outcomes of skin cancers in pediatric allogeneic HSCT recipients. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Web of Science were systematically searched (Prospero CRD42022342139). Studies reporting cutaneous cancer outcomes were included if the age at transplant was ≤19 years. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened in duplicate. RESULTS: Out of 824 citations that were screened, 12 articles were selected for analysis. The final sample included 67 pediatric HSCT recipients, comprising 65 allogeneic transplant recipients and 2 cases of HSCT with an unknown donor type. The median age at transplant and skin cancer diagnosis were 7.4 and 13 years, respectively. Out of the 67 pediatric HSCT recipients, some patients developed more than one lesion, resulting in 71 lesions. The most common skin cancer type was cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (32 lesions), followed by basal cell carcinoma (25 lesions). The median latency period between HSCT and skin cancer diagnosis ranged from 0 to 29 years. Identified risk factors for skin cancers included younger age at the time of transplant, exposure to total body irradiation, prolonged post-transplant immunosuppression, graft versus host disease, and sunburn. CONCLUSION: Skin cancers are reported in pediatric allogeneic HSCT recipients, and the risk appears to be increased. More data are needed to better characterize this risk.


Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Doença Enxerto-Hospedeiro , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Humanos , Criança , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Neoplasias Cutâneas/etiologia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/etiologia , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/efeitos adversos , Doença Enxerto-Hospedeiro/complicações , Transplante Homólogo/efeitos adversos , Progressão da Doença
8.
Rev. panam. salud pública ; 48: e13, 2024. tab, graf
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1536672

RESUMO

resumen está disponible en el texto completo


ABSTRACT The CONSORT 2010 statement provides minimum guidelines for reporting randomized trials. Its widespread use has been instrumental in ensuring transparency in the evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate impact on health outcomes. The CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trials evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for clinical trial protocols: SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 29 candidate items, which were assessed by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a two-day consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The CONSORT-AI extension includes 14 new items that were considered sufficiently important for AI interventions that they should be routinely reported in addition to the core CONSORT 2010 items. CONSORT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention is integrated, the handling of inputs and outputs of the AI intervention, the human-AI interaction and provision of an analysis of error cases. CONSORT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness in reporting clinical trials for AI interventions. It will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the quality of clinical trial design and risk of bias in the reported outcomes.


RESUMO A declaração CONSORT 2010 apresenta diretrizes mínimas para relatórios de ensaios clínicos randomizados. Seu uso generalizado tem sido fundamental para garantir a transparência na avaliação de novas intervenções. Recentemente, tem-se reconhecido cada vez mais que intervenções que incluem inteligência artificial (IA) precisam ser submetidas a uma avaliação rigorosa e prospectiva para demonstrar seus impactos sobre os resultados de saúde. A extensão CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials - Artificial Intelligence) é uma nova diretriz para relatórios de ensaios clínicos que avaliam intervenções com um componente de IA. Ela foi desenvolvida em paralelo à sua declaração complementar para protocolos de ensaios clínicos, a SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials - Artificial Intelligence). Ambas as diretrizes foram desenvolvidas por meio de um processo de consenso em etapas que incluiu revisão da literatura e consultas a especialistas para gerar 29 itens candidatos. Foram feitas consultas sobre esses itens a um grupo internacional composto por 103 interessados diretos, que participaram de uma pesquisa Delphi em duas etapas. Chegou-se a um acordo sobre os itens em uma reunião de consenso que incluiu 31 interessados diretos, e os itens foram refinados por meio de uma lista de verificação piloto que envolveu 34 participantes. A extensão CONSORT-AI inclui 14 itens novos que, devido à sua importância para as intervenções de IA, devem ser informados rotineiramente juntamente com os itens básicos da CONSORT 2010. A CONSORT-AI preconiza que os pesquisadores descrevam claramente a intervenção de IA, incluindo instruções e as habilidades necessárias para seu uso, o contexto no qual a intervenção de IA está inserida, considerações sobre o manuseio dos dados de entrada e saída da intervenção de IA, a interação humano-IA e uma análise dos casos de erro. A CONSORT-AI ajudará a promover a transparência e a integralidade nos relatórios de ensaios clínicos com intervenções que utilizam IA. Seu uso ajudará editores e revisores, bem como leitores em geral, a entender, interpretar e avaliar criticamente a qualidade do desenho do ensaio clínico e o risco de viés nos resultados relatados.

9.
Rev. panam. salud pública ; 48: e12, 2024. tab, graf
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1536674

RESUMO

resumen está disponible en el texto completo


ABSTRACT The SPIRIT 2013 statement aims to improve the completeness of clinical trial protocol reporting by providing evidence-based recommendations for the minimum set of items to be addressed. This guidance has been instrumental in promoting transparent evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate their impact on health outcomes. The SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trial protocols evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for trial reports: CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 26 candidate items, which were consulted upon by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The SPIRIT-AI extension includes 15 new items that were considered sufficiently important for clinical trial protocols of AI interventions. These new items should be routinely reported in addition to the core SPIRIT 2013 items. SPIRIT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention will be integrated, considerations for the handling of input and output data, the human-AI interaction and analysis of error cases. SPIRIT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness for clinical trial protocols for AI interventions. Its use will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the design and risk of bias for a planned clinical trial.


RESUMO A declaração SPIRIT 2013 tem como objetivo melhorar a integralidade dos relatórios dos protocolos de ensaios clínicos, fornecendo recomendações baseadas em evidências para o conjunto mínimo de itens que devem ser abordados. Essas orientações têm sido fundamentais para promover uma avaliação transparente de novas intervenções. Recentemente, tem-se reconhecido cada vez mais que intervenções que incluem inteligência artificial (IA) precisam ser submetidas a uma avaliação rigorosa e prospectiva para demonstrar seus impactos sobre os resultados de saúde. A extensão SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials - Artificial Intelligence) é uma nova diretriz de relatório para protocolos de ensaios clínicos que avaliam intervenções com um componente de IA. Essa diretriz foi desenvolvida em paralelo à sua declaração complementar para relatórios de ensaios clínicos, CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials - Artificial Intelligence). Ambas as diretrizes foram desenvolvidas por meio de um processo de consenso em etapas que incluiu revisão da literatura e consultas a especialistas para gerar 26 itens candidatos. Foram feitas consultas sobre esses itens a um grupo internacional composto por 103 interessados diretos, que participaram de uma pesquisa Delphi em duas etapas. Chegou-se a um acordo sobre os itens em uma reunião de consenso que incluiu 31 interessados diretos, e os itens foram refinados por meio de uma lista de verificação piloto que envolveu 34 participantes. A extensão SPIRIT-AI inclui 15 itens novos que foram considerados suficientemente importantes para os protocolos de ensaios clínicos com intervenções que utilizam IA. Esses itens novos devem constar dos relatórios de rotina, juntamente com os itens básicos da SPIRIT 2013. A SPIRIT-AI preconiza que os pesquisadores descrevam claramente a intervenção de IA, incluindo instruções e as habilidades necessárias para seu uso, o contexto no qual a intervenção de IA será integrada, considerações sobre o manuseio dos dados de entrada e saída, a interação humano-IA e a análise de casos de erro. A SPIRIT-AI ajudará a promover a transparência e a integralidade nos protocolos de ensaios clínicos com intervenções que utilizam IA. Seu uso ajudará editores e revisores, bem como leitores em geral, a entender, interpretar e avaliar criticamente o delineamento e o risco de viés de um futuro estudo clínico.

11.
EClinicalMedicine ; 65: 102283, 2023 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37877001

RESUMO

Background: Interventional trials that evaluate treatment effects using surrogate endpoints have become increasingly common. This paper describes four linked empirical studies and the development of a framework for defining, interpreting and reporting surrogate endpoints in trials. Methods: As part of developing the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) extensions for randomised trials reporting surrogate endpoints, we undertook a scoping review, e-Delphi study, consensus meeting, and a web survey to examine current definitions and stakeholder (including clinicians, trial investigators, patients and public partners, journal editors, and health technology experts) interpretations of surrogate endpoints as primary outcome measures in trials. Findings: Current surrogate endpoint definitional frameworks are inconsistent and unclear. Surrogate endpoints are used in trials as a substitute of the treatment effects of an intervention on the target outcome(s) of ultimate interest, events measuring how patients feel, function, or survive. Traditionally the consideration of surrogate endpoints in trials has focused on biomarkers (e.g., HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, tumour response), especially in the medical product regulatory setting. Nevertheless, the concept of surrogacy in trials is potentially broader. Intermediate outcomes that include a measure of function or symptoms (e.g., angina frequency, exercise tolerance) can also be used as substitute for target outcomes (e.g., all-cause mortality)-thereby acting as surrogate endpoints. However, we found a lack of consensus among stakeholders on accepting and interpreting intermediate outcomes in trials as surrogate endpoints or target outcomes. In our assessment, patients and health technology assessment experts appeared more likely to consider intermediate outcomes to be surrogate endpoints than clinicians and regulators. Interpretation: There is an urgent need for better understanding and reporting on the use of surrogate endpoints, especially in the setting of interventional trials. We provide a framework for the definition of surrogate endpoints (biomarkers and intermediate outcomes) and target outcomes in trials to improve future reporting and aid stakeholders' interpretation and use of trial surrogate endpoint evidence. Funding: SPIRIT-SURROGATE/CONSORT-SURROGATE project is Medical Research Council Better Research Better Health (MR/V038400/1) funded.

12.
Br J Dermatol ; 2023 Oct 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37874770

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) is a rare, aggressive skin cancer that most commonly occurs in UV-exposed body sites. Its epidemiology in different geographies and populations is not well characterised. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review is to summarize evidence on the incidence, mortality, and survival rates of MCC from population-based studies. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to June 6th, 2023. No geographic, age or date exclusions were applied. We included population-based studies of MCC that reported the incidence, survival, or mortality rate, and considered systematic reviews. A data-charting form was created and validated to identify variables to extract. Two reviewers then independently charted the data for each included study with patient characteristics, and estimates of incidence rate, mortality rate, and survival rate and assessed the quality of included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Prevalence studies, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews. We abstracted age-, sex-, stage- and race-stratified outcomes, and synthesized comparisons between strata narratively and using vote counting. We assessed the certainty of evidence for those comparisons using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Developments and Evaluations framework. RESULTS: We identified 11,472 citations, of which 52 studies from 24 countries met our inclusion criteria. Stage 1 and the head and neck were the most frequently reported stage and location at diagnosis. The incidence of MCC is increasing over time (high certainty), with the highest reported incidences reported in Southern hemisphere countries (Australia [2.5 per 100,000], New Zealand [0.96 per 100,000]) (high certainty). Male patients generally had higher incidence rates compared to female patients (high certainty), although there were some variations over time periods. Survival rates varied, with lower survival and/or higher mortality associated with male sex (moderate certainty), higher stage at diagnosis (moderate-to-high certainty), older age (moderate certainty), and immunosuppression (low-to-moderate certainty). CONCLUSIONS: MCC is increasing in incidence and may increase further given the ageing population of many countries. The prognosis of MCC is poor, particularly for males, those who are immunosuppressed, and patients diagnosed at higher stages or at an older age.

13.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 89(2): 243-253, 2023 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37105517

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The association between hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and skin cancer remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether HCTZ is associated with an increased risk of skin cancer compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel blockers. METHODS: Two new-user, active comparator cohorts were assembled using 6 Canadian databases. Site-specific hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were estimated using standardized morbidity ratio weighted Cox proportional hazard models and pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: HCTZ was not associated with an overall increased risk of keratinocyte carcinoma compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or calcium channel blockers, although increased risks were observed with longer durations (≥10 years; HR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.03-1.21) and higher cumulative doses (≥100,000 mg; HR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.27-1.76). For melanoma, there was no association with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, but a 32% increased risk with calcium channel blockers (crude incidence rates: 64.2 vs 58.4 per 100,000 person-years; HR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.19-1.46; estimated number needed to harm at 5 years of follow-up: 1627 patients), with increased risks with longer durations and cumulative doses. LIMITATIONS: Residual confounding due to the observational design. CONCLUSIONS: Increased risks of keratinocyte carcinoma and melanoma were observed with longer durations of use and higher cumulative doses of HCTZ.


Assuntos
Carcinoma , Hipertensão , Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Humanos , Hidroclorotiazida/efeitos adversos , Bloqueadores dos Canais de Cálcio/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Coortes , Canadá , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Cutâneas/induzido quimicamente , Neoplasias Cutâneas/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/complicações , Melanoma/induzido quimicamente , Melanoma/epidemiologia , Melanoma/complicações , Queratinócitos , Hipertensão/tratamento farmacológico , Anti-Hipertensivos/efeitos adversos
14.
J Cutan Med Surg ; 27(2): 133-139, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36995350

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Skin Investigation Network of Canada (SkIN Canada) is a new national skin research network. To shape the research landscape and ensure its value to patient care, research priorities that are important to patients, caregivers, and health care providers must be identified. OBJECTIVES: To identify the Top Ten research priorities for 9 key skin conditions. METHODS: We first surveyed health care providers and researchers to select the top skin conditions for future research within the categories of inflammatory skin disease, skin cancers (other than melanoma), and wound healing. For those selected skin conditions, we conducted scoping reviews to identify previous priority setting exercises. We combined the results of those scoping reviews with a survey of patients, health care providers, and researchers to generate lists of knowledge gaps for each condition. We then surveyed patients and health care providers to create preliminary rankings to prioritize those knowledge gaps. Finally, we conducted workshops of patients and health care providers to create the final Top Ten lists of research priorities for each condition. RESULTS: Overall, 538 patients, health care providers, and researchers participated in at least one survey or workshop. Psoriasis, atopic dermatitis and hidradenitis suppurativa (inflammatory skin disease); chronic wounds, burns and scars (wound healing); and basal cell, squamous cell and Merkel cell carcinoma (skin cancer) were selected as priority skin conditions. Top Ten lists of knowledge gaps for inflammatory skin conditions encompassed a range of issues relevant to patient care, including questions on pathogenesis, prevention, non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic management. CONCLUSIONS: Research priorities derived from patients and health care providers should be used to guide multidisciplinary research networks, funders, and policymakers in Canada and internationally.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Dermatite Atópica , Hidradenite Supurativa , Psoríase , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Humanos , Hidradenite Supurativa/epidemiologia , Hidradenite Supurativa/terapia , Dermatite Atópica/epidemiologia , Dermatite Atópica/terapia , Prioridades em Saúde , Canadá/epidemiologia
15.
J Cutan Med Surg ; 27(1): 20-27, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36408849

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: For dermatology to effectively address the ever-growing medical needs, longstanding communication barriers across investigators working in different research pillars and practicing clinicians must be improved. To address this problem, trainee-specific programs are now evolving to align their educational landscape across basic science, translational and clinical research programs. OBJECTIVES: To establish a Skin Investigation Network of Canada (SkIN Canada) training roadmap for the career and skill development of future clinicians, clinican scientists and basic scientists in Canada. This Working Group aims to strengthen and harmonize collaborations and capacity across the skin research community. METHODS: The Working Group conducted a search of established international academic societies which offered trainee programs with mandates similar to SkIN Canada. Societies' program items and meetings were evaluated by use of an interview survey and/or the collection of publicly available data. Program logistics, objectives and feedback were assessed for commonalities and factors reported or determined to improve trainee experience. RESULTS: Through the various factors explored, the Working Group discovered the need for increasing program accessibility, creating opportunities for soft skill development, emphasizing the importance of current challenges, collecting and responding to feedback, and improving knowledge sharing to bridge pillars of skin research. CONCLUSIONS: Although improvements have been made to trainee education in recent years, a plurality of approaches exist and many of the underlying roadblocks remain unresolved. To establish fundamental clinician-basic scientist collaboration and training efforts, this Working Group highlights important factors to include and consider in building a trainee program and emphasizes the importance of trainee education.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Humanos , Canadá , Inquéritos e Questionários , Escolaridade
16.
Arch Dermatol Res ; 315(4): 735-749, 2023 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36443500

RESUMO

Photoprotection is a critical health prevention strategy to reduce the deleterious effects of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and visible light (VL). Methods of photoprotection are reviewed in this paper, with an emphasis on sunscreen. The most appropriate sunscreen formulation for personal use depends on several factors. Active sunscreen ingredients vary in their protective effect over the UVR and VL spectrum. There are dermatologic diseases that cause photosensitivity or that are aggravated by a particular action spectrum. In these situations, sunscreen suggestions can address the specific concern. Sunscreen does not represent a single entity. Appropriate personalized sunscreen selection is critical to improve compliance and clinical outcomes. Health care providers can facilitate informed product selection with awareness of evolving sunscreen formulations and counseling patients on appropriate use. This review aims to summarize different forms of photoprotection, discuss absorption of sunscreen ingredients, possible adverse effects, and disease-specific preferences for chemical, physical or oral agents that may decrease UVR and VL harmful effects.


Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Protetores Solares , Humanos , Protetores Solares/efeitos adversos , Raios Ultravioleta/efeitos adversos , Luz , Veículos Farmacêuticos
17.
JAMA Dermatol ; 159(1): 87-94, 2023 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36322063

RESUMO

Importance: Patients treated for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and basal cell carcinoma (BCC), collectively called keratinocyte carcinoma (KC), are at risk for recurrence, metastasis, and additional primary cutaneous malignant neoplasms. It is unclear how often patients should be seen for follow-up skin examination after initial treatment of KC. Objective: To summarize the recommendations and evaluate the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for dermatologic follow-up of patients with BCC and invasive SCC. Evidence Review: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched for relevant articles published from January 2010 to March 2022. Search terms included guideline, squamous cell carcinoma, and basal cell carcinoma. National or international guidelines containing recommendations for follow-up frequency after a diagnosis of localized cutaneous KC were included. Quality was assessed using the 6 domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool: (1) scope and purpose; (2) stakeholder development; (3) rigor of development; (4) clarity of presentation; (5) applicability; and (6) editorial independence. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) was used to guide study reporting. Findings: Among the 14 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria, there was little consensus on the appropriate follow-up frequency after initial KC treatment. Overall duration of follow-up ranged from a single posttreatment visit to lifelong surveillance. Most guidelines stratified their recommendations by recurrence risk. For low-risk BCC and guidelines that did not stratify by risk, follow-up recommendations ranged from every 6 to 12 months. For high-risk BCC, 1 guideline suggested follow-up every 3 months, while 4 recommended every 6 months. For low-risk SCC, 5 guidelines recommended annual follow-up; 3 guidelines, every 6 months; and 1 guideline, every 3 months. For high-risk SCC, recommendations included a range of follow-up frequencies, spanning every 3 months (n = 5 guidelines), 4 months (n = 1), 6 months (n = 6), or annually (n = 4). One guideline did not use risk stratification and recommended annual screening. The highest scoring AGREE II domain was "scope and purpose," which assessed the guideline's overall objectives, and the lowest scoring was "applicability," which assessed barriers and facilitators to implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systemic review highlight variations in follow-up recommendations for patients after initial treatment for KC. Randomized clinical trials are needed to define an optimal follow-up regimen.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Basocelular , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Humanos , Carcinoma Basocelular/diagnóstico , Carcinoma Basocelular/terapia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/terapia , Seguimentos , Queratinócitos , Neoplasias Cutâneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutâneas/terapia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto
18.
Rev. panam. salud pública ; 47: e149, 2023. tab, graf
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1536665

RESUMO

resumen está disponible en el texto completo


ABSTRACT The SPIRIT 2013 statement aims to improve the completeness of clinical trial protocol reporting by providing evidence-based recommendations for the minimum set of items to be addressed. This guidance has been instrumental in promoting transparent evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate their impact on health outcomes. The SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trial protocols evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for trial reports: CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 26 candidate items, which were consulted upon by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The SPIRIT-AI extension includes 15 new items that were considered sufficiently important for clinical trial protocols of AI interventions. These new items should be routinely reported in addition to the core SPIRIT 2013 items. SPIRIT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention will be integrated, considerations for the handling of input and output data, the human-AI interaction and analysis of error cases. SPIRIT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness for clinical trial protocols for AI interventions. Its use will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the design and risk of bias for a planned clinical trial.


RESUMO A declaração SPIRIT 2013 tem como objetivo melhorar a integralidade dos relatórios dos protocolos de ensaios clínicos, fornecendo recomendações baseadas em evidências para o conjunto mínimo de itens que devem ser abordados. Essas orientações têm sido fundamentais para promover uma avaliação transparente de novas intervenções. Recentemente, tem-se reconhecido cada vez mais que intervenções que incluem inteligência artificial (IA) precisam ser submetidas a uma avaliação rigorosa e prospectiva para demonstrar seus impactos sobre os resultados de saúde. A extensão SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials - Artificial Intelligence) é uma nova diretriz de relatório para protocolos de ensaios clínicos que avaliam intervenções com um componente de IA. Essa diretriz foi desenvolvida em paralelo à sua declaração complementar para relatórios de ensaios clínicos, CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials - Artificial Intelligence). Ambas as diretrizes foram desenvolvidas por meio de um processo de consenso em etapas que incluiu revisão da literatura e consultas a especialistas para gerar 26 itens candidatos. Foram feitas consultas sobre esses itens a um grupo internacional composto por 103 interessados diretos, que participaram de uma pesquisa Delphi em duas etapas. Chegou-se a um acordo sobre os itens em uma reunião de consenso que incluiu 31 interessados diretos, e os itens foram refinados por meio de uma lista de verificação piloto que envolveu 34 participantes. A extensão SPIRIT-AI inclui 15 itens novos que foram considerados suficientemente importantes para os protocolos de ensaios clínicos com intervenções que utilizam IA. Esses itens novos devem constar dos relatórios de rotina, juntamente com os itens básicos da SPIRIT 2013. A SPIRIT-AI preconiza que os pesquisadores descrevam claramente a intervenção de IA, incluindo instruções e as habilidades necessárias para seu uso, o contexto no qual a intervenção de IA será integrada, considerações sobre o manuseio dos dados de entrada e saída, a interação humano-IA e a análise de casos de erro. A SPIRIT-AI ajudará a promover a transparência e a integralidade nos protocolos de ensaios clínicos com intervenções que utilizam IA. Seu uso ajudará editores e revisores, bem como leitores em geral, a entender, interpretar e avaliar criticamente o delineamento e o risco de viés de um futuro estudo clínico.

19.
Anal Chem ; 94(48): 16821-16830, 2022 12 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36395434

RESUMO

Currently, a large number of skin biopsies are taken for each true skin cancer case detected, creating a need for a rapid, high sensitivity, and specificity skin cancer detection tool to reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies taken from benign tissue. Picosecond infrared laser mass spectrometry (PIRL-MS) using a hand-held sampling probe is reported to detect and classify melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and normal skin with average sensitivity and specificity values of 86-95% and 91-98%, respectively (at a 95% confidence level) solely requiring 10 s or less of total data collection and analysis time. Classifications are not adversely affected by specimen's quantity of melanin pigments and are mediated by a number of metabolic lipids, further identified herein as potential biomarkers for skin cancer-type differentiation, 19 of which were sufficient here (as a fully characterized metabolite array) to provide high specificity and sensitivity classification of skin cancer types. In situ detection was demonstrated in an intradermal melanoma mouse model wherein in vivo sampling did not cause significant discomfort. PIRL-MS sampling is further shown to be compatible with downstream gross histopathologic evaluations despite loss of tissue from the immediate laser sampling site(s) and can be configured using selective laser pulses to avoid thermal damage to normal skin. Therefore, PIRL-MS may be employed as a decision-support tool to reduce both the subjectivity of clinical diagnosis and the number of unnecessary biopsies currently required for skin cancer screening.


Assuntos
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Camundongos , Animais , Estudos de Viabilidade , Lasers , Neoplasias Cutâneas/diagnóstico , Raios Infravermelhos , Espectrometria de Massas , Melanoma/diagnóstico
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA