Validity and reliability of the Rosacea Area and Severity Index: A novel scoring system for clinical assessment of rosacea severity.

BACKGROUND: Rosacea is a common chronic inflammatory facial skin disorder. Standardized evaluation of the severity and extent of rosacea is important for baseline assessment and treatment effect. The currently used Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) is unspecific and fails to consider subtypes/phenotypes of rosacea and area involvement. The Rosacea Area and Severity Index (RASI) was developed to give a more nuanced evaluation of rosacea features in four facial skin areas adjusted to the relative importance of each area of the face to obtain an overall severity score. OBJECTIVES: To validate RASI against the IGA and to assess the inter- and intraobserver reliability for RASI. METHODS: Sixteen dermatologists evaluated photographs of 60 adult patients with rosacea (3 photographs per patient, one from the front and one from each side). IGA and RASI scores were performed for interobserver reliability assessment. To determine intraobserver reliability, 14 dermatologists evaluated 10 other patients twice with at least 1 week interval. RESULTS: The IGA and RASI correlated well (Spearman correlation coefficient (SCC) = 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.72-0.78). Interobserver reliability was moderate for RASI and poor to moderate for IGA. Reliability was strongest for rhinophyma, followed by papules/pustules and erythema, and rather weak for telangiectasia. For area scores, interobserver reliability was strongest for cheeks, followed by nose, chin and forehead. We found a moderate-to-strong intraobserver agreement both for IGA and RASI. CONCLUSIONS: We have designed a new practical tool to examine clinical severity of rosacea. RASI proved simple and reliable in scoring clinical severity of rosacea with an agreement comparable to the currently used IGA although RASI will provide a more nuanced view of the current rosacea extent and severity. We suggest that RASI is used in the daily clinical setting as well as in clinical studies assessing the efficacy of rosacea therapies.

Protoporphyrin IX formation and photobleaching in different layers of normal human skin: methyl- and hexylaminolevulinate and different light sources.

Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) is used for various skin disorders, and selective targeting of specific skin structures is desirable. The objective was to assess accumulation of PpIX fluorescence and photobleaching within skin layers using different photosensitizers and light sources. Normal human skin was tape-stripped and incubated with 20% methylaminolevulinate (MAL) or 20% hexylaminolevulinate (HAL) for 3 h. Fluorescence microscopy quantified PpIX accumulation in epidermis, superficial, mid and deep dermis, down to 2 mm. PpIX photobleaching by light-emitting diode (LED, 632 nm, 18 and 37 J/cm(2)), intense pulsed light (IPL, 500-650 nm, 36 and 72 J/cm(2)) and long-pulsed dye laser (LPDL, 595 nm, 7.5 and 15 J/cm(2)) was measured using fluorescence photography and microscopy. We found higher PpIX fluorescence intensities in epidermis and superficial dermis in HAL-incubated skin than MAL-incubated skin (P < 0.001). In mid and deep dermis, fluorescence intensities were higher (37%) in HAL-treated skin than MAL-treated skin, although not significant (P = ns). At skin surface, photobleaching was significantly higher (90-98%) after LED illumination (18 and 37 J/cm²) than IPL (29-53%, 36 and 72 J/cm²) and LPDL (43-62%, 7 and 15 J/cm²) (P < 0.001). Within the skin, photobleaching was steady from epidermis to deep dermis by LED illumination (37 J/cm², P = ns), but declined from epidermis to mid and deep dermis for IPL-treated skin and LPDL-treated skin (IPL 72 J/cm²: 26-15%; LPDL 15 J/cm²: 37-23%) (P < 0.04). Clinically, erythema correlated linearly with MAL and HAL-induced photobleaching (r² = 0.175, P < 0.001). In conclusion, selective PpIX accumulation indicates HAL as an alternative to MAL for epidermal-targeted PDT. In clinically relevant doses, PpIX photobleaching throughout the skin was more profound following LED than LPDL and IPL exposure.