Electrochemotherapy with bleomycin for basal cell carcinomas: a systematic review.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common type of cancer and an increasing incidence stimulates the interest in new treatments such as electrochemotherapy (ECT) with bleomycin. This systematic review focuses on literature from the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. Bleomycin-ECT studies (n = 32) were sorted by the level of evidence adjusted for their BCC data only. The studies included a single randomised controlled trial (RCT), 15 uncontrolled clinical trials, three registry studies, six prospective case series and seven retrospective case series. A Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment of the RCT identified some minor concerns but no predicted risk of bias. The studies were also grouped by bleomycin administration routes: intravenous (n = 14), intralesional (n = 9) and mixed reporting/usage (n = 9). A meta-analysis was not conducted due to the lack of RCTs and the heterogeneity of the included studies. The results of the RCT generally reflected the findings of the other included studies and showed a 92% complete response in 65 bleomycin-ECT-treated BCCs after 2 months, improving to 100% after re-treatment, with a low risk of recurrence. Based on the RCT results and overall data, future studies on BCC treatment with bleomycin-ECT should include large RCTs that compare bleomycin-ECT with standard of care, cost analyses, and clinical feasibility.

Increased protoporphyrin IX accumulation does not improve the effect of photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) with methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL) is highly effective for treating actinic keratosis (AK) on the face/scalp, but less effective on the extremities. Insufficient accumulation of protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) may cause these inferior efficacy rates. However, it is possible to increase PpIX accumulation by extending the MAL application time and/or pretreating the skin with curettage. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether increased PpIX accumulation improves the effect of MAL-PDT for AKs in a randomized intra-individual study. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with 533 AKs on both hands were treated with MAL-PDT. To obtain different concentrations of PpIX, four symmetrical areas on each patient were randomly allocated to different regimens: (i) 3-h MAL application without prior curettage (3hC-); (ii) 3 h with curettage (3hC+); (iii) 21 h without curettage (21hC-); and (iv) 21 h with curettage (21hC+). Treatment efficacy was evaluated after 3 months, whereas PpIX fluorescence, pain and erythema were assessed during and after PDT. RESULTS: Extended MAL application with and without curettage increased PpIX accumulation significantly compared with the standard 3hC+ regimen (P = 0·001 and P = 0·002, respectively). However, the median total clearance rates did not improve accordingly: 3hC+ (55·0%), 21hC- (55·0%) and 21hC+ (53·6%). Conversely, insufficient PpIX accumulation in the 3hC- regimen led to a significantly lower clearance rate (33·3%) than the other regimens (P < 0·045). Furthermore, pain and erythema were correlated to PpIX accumulation. CONCLUSIONS: Increased PpIX accumulation does not improve the effect of MAL-PDT for AKs on the hands, but leads to worse adverse events. Different strategies are needed to improve PDT on the extremities.

Pulse photodynamic therapy reduces inflammation without compromising efficacy in the treatment of multiple mild actinic keratoses of the face and scalp: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The main side-effects of photodynamic therapy (PDT) for actinic keratoses (AKs) are post-treatment erythema and oedema, and pain during illumination. Severe erythema after PDT enhances the down time associated with the treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in a randomized intraindividual study whether pulse-PDT and corticosteroid pulse-PDT would reduce treatment-induced erythema compared with conventional PDT. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with multiple mild AKs on the face and scalp were treated with methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL)-PDT in three similar areas. Two areas were incubated with MAL for 30 min (pulse-PDT) and one area was incubated with MAL for 3 h (conventional PDT). All areas were illuminated with red light after 3 h. In one of the pulse-PDT areas a superpotent corticosteroid was applied before and just after PDT (S-pulse-PDT). RESULTS: Pulse-PDT significantly reduced PDT-induced erythema (P = 0·020), and erythema was even further reduced by S-pulse-PDT (P < 0·001). The complete lesion response rate 3 months after PDT did not differ significantly between the three treated areas. CONCLUSIONS: Pulse-PDT and S-pulse-PDT reduced erythema 24 h after treatment of multiple mild AKs on the face and scalp. The use of a short MAL application time and topical corticosteroid did not affect the efficacy of PDT and may be an easy way to make PDT treatment of large visible areas more acceptable.

Topical corticosteroid reduces inflammation without compromising the efficacy of photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an effective and established treatment for actinic keratoses (AK) and nonmelanoma skin cancer. The main side-effects of PDT are post-treatment erythema and oedema, and pain during illumination. Severe erythema after PDT enhances the down time associated with the treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in a randomized intraindividual study whether use of a topical corticosteroid just before and just after PDT would reduce treatment-induced erythema compared with conventional PDT. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with multiple AKs in the face and scalp were treated with methyl aminolaevulinate PDT in two symmetrical areas. One area was randomized to superpotent corticosteroid (clobetasol propionate) before and just after PDT. Objective and visual erythema, protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) fluorescence and pain were evaluated. RESULTS: Topical corticosteroid significantly reduced PDT-induced erythema (P = 0·012). The complete lesion response rate 3 months after PDT, and PpIX fluorescence prior to illumination did not differ significantly between the two treated areas. CONCLUSIONS: Superpotent corticosteroid before and just after PDT reduced the erythema 24 h after treatment of multiple AKs on the face and scalp. The use of topical corticosteroid did not affect the efficacy of PDT and may be an easy way to make PDT treatment of large visible areas more acceptable.

Light protection of the skin after photodynamic therapy reduces inflammation: an unblinded randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is followed by significant inflammation. Protoporphyrin (Pp)IX is still formed in the skin after PDT and patients are sensitive to daylight 24-48 h after treatment. Exposure to daylight after PDT may therefore increase inflammation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether protection with inorganic sunscreen, foundation or light-blocking plaster after PDT can reduce inflammation caused by daylight-activated PpIX. METHODS: On the right arm of 15 subjects with sun-damaged skin, four identical squares (3 × 3 cm) were given conventional PDT treatment. Immediately after red-light illumination the squares were either left unprotected or protected by inorganic sunscreen [sun protection factor (SPF) 50], foundation (SPF50) or light-blocking plaster. The skin was then illuminated with artificial daylight for 2 h and afterwards covered for 24 h. Fluorescence and erythema (inflammation) were measured with a fluorescence camera and a reflectance meter. RESULTS: PpIX was significantly reduced after artificial daylight illumination (P < 0·0004), except on the square protected with light-blocking silver plaster, where it had increased (P = 0·09). The increased erythema 24 h after treatment was reduced by 19% with the sunscreen (P = 0·29), by 27% with the foundation (P = 0·10) and by 44% with the silver plaster (P = 0·002). CONCLUSIONS: Artificial daylight exposure after conventional PDT increases skin erythema. Light-blocking plaster gives more effective protection against post-PDT daylight exposure than inorganic sunscreen and foundation. In practice such full protection can be achieved by use of sun-blocking clothes or daylight avoidance for 24 h.

Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy of basal cell carcinomas - an explorative study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that daylight-photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an effective treatment of actinic keratoses, nearly pain free and more convenient for both the clinics and patients. Treatment of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) is another main indication for PDT. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this open, uncontrolled, prospective explorative study was to evaluate the efficacy of daylight-PDT for BCCs. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with a total of 32 BCCs located in the face, scalp, chest, back and lower leg received one cycle of daylight-methyl aminolevulinate (MAL)-PDT, consisting of two treatments 1 week apart. After sunscreen application and lesion preparation, MAL was applied and patients exposed themselves to daylight for 2½ h. Daylight exposure was monitored with a wrist-borne dosimeter. RESULTS: At 3-month follow-up, complete response was seen in 30 lesions (94%) and in 19 patients (90%). At 12-month follow-up, six lesions had recurred resulting in a total recurrence rate of 21% (6/29) as one lesion was lost to follow-up. Twelve months after daylight-PDT, 74% (23/31) of the treated lesions showed complete response. During each treatment, the mean effective light dose was 10.8 J/cm(2) during an average of 152 min of daylight exposure. Treatment was pain free with good or excellent cosmesis. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, daylight-PDT proved to be as effective as conventional PDT in the treatment of BCCs in this explorative clinical study. Daylight-PDT was pain free and more convenient for both clinicians and patients. The cosmetic outcome was good or excellent. Larger studies need to confirm the findings of this study.

Weather conditions and daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy: protoporphyrin IX-weighted daylight doses measured in six geographical locations.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an attractive therapy for nonmelanoma skin cancers and actinic keratoses (AKs). Daylight-mediated methyl aminolaevulinate PDT (daylight-PDT) is a simple and painless treatment procedure for PDT. All daylight-PDT studies have been performed in the Nordic countries. To be able to apply these results in other parts of the world we have to compare the daily protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) light dose in other countries with the PpIX light doses found in Nordic countries. OBJECTIVES: To calculate where and when daylight-PDT of AKs was possible in six different geographical locations using ground stations measuring PpIX-weighted daylight doses. METHODS: PpIX-weighted daylight doses were measured using a dosimeter with a customer-specific photodiode with a detector sensitivity that mimics the PpIX absorption spectrum and measures in 'PpIX doses'. The dosimeters were built into ground stations that were placed in six geographical locations measuring from July to December 2008. Temperature data for each location were obtained from the internet. The maximal ultraviolet (UV) index for Copenhagen was obtained for the measuring period of the dosimeters. RESULTS: If the PpIX light dose should be above 8Jcm(-2) and the maximum temperature of the day at least 10°C, it was possible to treat patients on nearly all days until the middle of September in Reykjavik and Oslo, until the last week of October in Copenhagen and Regensburg, until the middle of November in Turin and all year in Israel. CONCLUSIONS: Where and when to perform daylight-PDT depends on the PpIX light dose and outdoor temperature. The PpIX light dose was influenced by the geographical location (latitude), weather condition and time of year. The UV index was not more suitable than temperature and weather to predict if the intensity of daylight would be sufficient for daylight-PDT.

Daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: an international consensus: International Society for Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an attractive therapy for non-melanoma skin cancers including actinic keratoses (AKs) because it allows treatment of large areas; it has a high response rate and results in an excellent cosmesis. However, conventional PDT for AKs is associated with inconveniently long clinic visits and discomfort during therapy. In this article, we critically review daylight-mediated PDT, which is a simpler and more tolerable treatment procedure for PDT. We review the effective light dose, efficacy and safety, the need for prior application of sunscreen, and potential clinical scope of daylight-PDT. Three randomized controlled studies have shown that daylight-mediated PDT is an effective treatment of thin AKs. Daylight-mediated PDT is nearly pain-free and more convenient for both the clinics and patients. Daylight-mediated PDT is especially suited for patients with large field-cancerized areas, which can easily be exposed to daylight. Further investigations are necessary to determine at which time of the year and in which weather conditions daylight-mediated PDT will be possible in different geographical locations.

Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy of moderate to thick actinic keratoses of the face and scalp: a randomized multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an attractive therapy for nonmelanoma skin cancers and actinic keratoses (AKs). Daylight-mediated PDT is a simple and tolerable treatment procedure for PDT. Methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL)-PDT is approved for the treatment of thin or nonhyperkeratotic AKs on the face and scalp. However, thick AK lesions are often treated as well when present in the field-cancerized treatment area. OBJECTIVES: In a randomized multicentre study to evaluate efficacy of daylight-mediated PDT for different severity grades of AKs. METHODS: One hundred and forty-five patients with a total of 2768 AKs (severity grades I-III) of the face and scalp were randomized to either 1½ or 2½ h exposure groups. After application of a sunscreen (sun protection factor 20) and gentle lesion preparation, MAL was applied to the entire treatment area. Patients left the clinic immediately after application and exposed themselves to daylight according to randomization. Daylight exposure was monitored with a wrist-borne dosimeter. RESULTS: No difference in lesion response was found between the 1½ and 2½ h exposure group. The mean lesion response rate was significantly higher in grade I lesions (75·9%) than in grade II (61·2%) and grade III (49·1%) lesions (P < 0·0001). Most grade II (86%) and III AKs (94%) were in complete response or reduced to a lower lesion grade at follow-up. Large variations in response rate of grade II and III AKs were found between centres. No association was found between response rate and light dose in patients who received an effective light dose of > 3·5 J cm(-2). CONCLUSIONS: Daylight-mediated PDT of moderate to thick AKs was less effective than daylight-mediated PDT of thin AKs especially in some centres. However, nearly all thicker lesions (grades II and III) were reduced to a lower lesion grade at 3 months after a single treatment of daylight-mediated PDT.

A randomized, multicentre study of directed daylight exposure times of 1½ vs. 2½ h in daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy with methyl aminolaevulinate in patients with multiple thin actinic keratoses of the face and scalp.

BACKGROUND: Actinic keratoses (AKs) are common dysplastic skin lesions that may differentiate into invasive squamous cell carcinomas. Although a superior cosmetic outcome of photodynamic therapy (PDT) is advantageous compared with equally effective treatments such as cryotherapy and curettage, the inconvenience of clinic attendance and discomfort during therapy are significant drawbacks. Daylight-mediated PDT could potentially reduce these and may serve as an alternative to conventional PDT. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL)-PDT with 1½ vs. 2½ h of daylight exposure in a randomized multicentre study. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients with a total of 1572 thin AKs of the face and scalp were randomized to either 1½- or 2½-h exposure groups. After gentle lesion preparation and application of a sunscreen of sun protection factor 20, MAL was applied to the entire treatment area. Immediately after, patients left the clinic and exposed themselves to daylight according to the randomization. Daylight exposure was monitored with a wristwatch dosimeter and patients scored their pain sensation during treatment. RESULTS: The mean lesion response rate at 3 months was 77% in the 1½-h group and 75% in the 2½-h group (P = 0·57). The mean duration of daylight exposure was 131 and 187 min in the two groups. The mean overall effective light dose was 9·4 J cm(-2) (range 0·2-28·3). Response rate was not associated with effective daylight dose, exposure duration, treatment centre, time of day or time of year during which the treatment was performed. Treatment was well tolerated, with a mean ± SD maximal pain score of 1·3 ± 1·5. CONCLUSIONS: Daylight-mediated MAL-PDT is an effective, convenient and nearly pain-free treatment for patients with multiple thin AKs. Daylight-mediated PDT procedures were easily performed and 2 h of daylight exposure resulted in uniformly high response rates when conducted in the period from June to October in Nordic countries.

Photodynamic therapy of actinic keratoses with 8% and 16% methyl aminolaevulinate and home-based daylight exposure: a double-blinded randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an effective but time-consuming and often painful treatment for actinic keratosis (AK). Home-based daylight-PDT has the potential to facilitate treatment procedure and to reduce associated pain due to continuous activation of small amounts of porphyrins. Moreover, a reduced methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL) concentration may reduce associated inflammation, making the treatment more tolerable for the patients. OBJECTIVES: To compare response rates and adverse effects after PDT using conventional 16% and 8% MAL with home-based daylight exposure in treatment of AK. METHODS: Thirty patients with mostly thin-grade AK of the face or scalp were treated with 16% and 8% MAL-PDT in two symmetrical areas after application of sunscreen. Immediately after, patients left the hospital with instructions to spend the remaining day outside at home in daylight. Patients scored pain during treatment and light exposure was monitored with an electronic wristwatch dosimeter. RESULTS: The complete response rate after 3 months was 76.9% for 16% MAL and 79.5% for 8% MAL (P = 0.37). Patients spent a mean of 244 min outdoors and received a mean effective light dose of 30 J cm(-2). Light doses of 8-70 J cm(-2) induced similar response rates (P = 0.25). Patients experienced mild to moderate pain during daylight exposure (mean maximal pain score of 3.7). No differences in pain scores and erythema were seen between the areas treated with 16% MAL and with 8% MAL. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based daylight-mediated MAL-PDT was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for AK. No differences in response rates or adverse events were found between the areas treated with 16% MAL and with 8% MAL.

Pain during photodynamic therapy is associated with protoporphyrin IX fluorescence and fluence rate.

BACKGROUND: Pain during photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a considerable problem that needs to be studied to improve this otherwise attractive treatment of skin diseases. OBJECTIVES: To compare pain during PDT using two different fluence rates, and also to evaluate the association between pain and protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) fluorescence, lesion type, lesion preparation and lesion localization. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with actinic keratoses (AKs) in different localizations and 34 patients with facial acne vulgaris were treated with methyl aminolaevulinate-PDT. Patients with acne were illuminated using two different fluence rates. Pain score during PDT and PpIX fluorescence prior to illumination were measured. RESULTS: The study showed that pain during illumination was associated with the PpIX fluorescence in the treatment area (P = 0.0003, R(2) = 0.31). When using a fluence rate of 34 mW cm(-2) patients with acne had a pain score of 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 5-7] compared with 8 (IQR 6-10) when using a fluence rate of 68 mW cm(-2) (P = 0.018). After correcting the pain score for PpIX fluorescence no differences in pain scores were found between first and second acne treatment, locations of AK lesions or between the two types of lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Pain during PDT was correlated with the PpIX fluorescence in the treatment area prior to illumination. Pain was reduced using a lower fluence rate during PDT of acne.

Continuous activation of PpIX by daylight is as effective as and less painful than conventional photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses; a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a highly effective treatment for actinic keratoses (AK); however, it is time consuming and often painful for the patient. Daylight-PDT would make the treatment independent of the clinic and less painful due to the continuous activation of small amounts of porphyrins during its formation. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this randomized controlled study was to compare response rates and adverse effects after methyl aminolevulinate (MAL)-PDT using conventional red light-emitting diode (LED) light vs. daylight. PATIENTS/METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with AK of the face and scalp were treated with MAL-PDT in two symmetrical areas. One area was illuminated by red LED light (37 J cm(-2)) after 3-h incubation with MAL under occlusive dressing. The other area was treated with daylight for 2.5 h after the MAL cream had been under occlusion for half an hour. RESULTS: We found no significant difference in the treatment effect between the two treatments (P = 0.13), with a reduction of AK lesions of 79% in the daylight area compared with 71% in the LED area. Treatment response in the daylight area did not depend on the intensity of the daylight. Illumination with LED was more painful than daylight (P < 0.0001). Erythema and crusting occurred after both treatments and were similar in the two areas. CONCLUSIONS: PDT of AK by continuous activation of porphyrins by daylight proved to be as effective as conventional PDT. PDT using daylight activation will make the treatment of these extremely common premalignant tumours more time and cost effective, and more convenient for the patient.

Photodynamic therapy of acne vulgaris using methyl aminolaevulinate: a blinded, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory acne vulgaris is a very common condition, particularly in adolescents and young adults, and new effective and well-tolerated treatments are needed. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of methyl aminolaevulinate-based photodynamic therapy (MAL-PDT) in patients with moderate to severe facial acne vulgaris in a randomized, controlled and investigator-blinded trial. METHODS: Twenty-one patients were assigned to the treatment group and 15 patients to the control group. The treatment group received two MAL-PDT treatments, 2 weeks apart. Both groups were evaluated 4, 8 and 12 weeks after treatment. Efficacy evaluation included changes from baseline in numbers of noninflammatory and inflammatory lesions, changes from baseline in global acne severity grade and clinical assessments of clinical improvement by patient and evaluating dermatologist. Pain scores during treatment and local adverse effects were also evaluated. RESULTS: Twelve weeks after treatment the treatment group showed a 68% reduction from baseline in inflammatory lesions vs. no change in the control group (P=0.0023). We found no reduction in number of noninflammatory lesions after treatment. All patients experienced moderate to severe pain during treatment and developed severe erythema, pustular eruptions and epithelial exfoliation. Seven patients did not receive the second treatment due to adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: MAL-PDT proved to be an efficient treatment for inflammatory acne. The treatment was associated with severe pain during treatment and severe adverse effects after treatments. Efforts must be made to optimize the treatment regimen and to avoid adverse effects.