Interventions for basal cell carcinoma of the skin.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the commonest cancer affecting white-skinned individuals, and worldwide incidence is increasing. Although rarely fatal, BCC is associated with significant morbidity and costs. First-line treatment is usually surgical excision, but alternatives are available. New published studies and the development of non-surgical treatments meant an update of our Cochrane Review (first published in 2003, and previously updated in 2007) was timely. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for BCC in immunocompetent adults. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to November 2019: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for BCC in immunocompetent adults with histologically-proven, primary BCC. Eligible comparators were placebo, active treatment, other treatments, or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcome measures were recurrence at three years and five years (measured clinically) (we included recurrence data outside of these time points if there was no measurement at three or five years) and participant- and observer-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain during and after treatment, early treatment failure within six months, and adverse effects (AEs). We used GRADE to assess evidence certainty for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 52 RCTs (26 new) involving 6690 participants (median 89) in this update. All studies recruited from secondary care outpatient clinics. More males than females were included. Study duration ranged from six weeks to 10 years (average 13 months). Most studies (48/52) included only low-risk BCC (superficial (sBCC) and nodular (nBCC) histological subtypes). The majority of studies were at low or unclear risk of bias for most domains. Twenty-two studies were industry-funded: commercial sponsors conducted most of the studies assessing imiquimod, and just under half of the photodynamic therapy (PDT) studies. Overall, surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates. For high-risk facial BCC (high-risk histological subtype or located in the facial 'H-zone' or both), there may be slightly fewer recurrences with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) compared to surgical excision (SE) at three years (1.9% versus 2.9%, respectively) (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 2.64; 1 study, 331 participants; low-certainty evidence) and at five years (3.2% versus 5.2%, respectively) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.04; 1 study, 259 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, the 95% CI also includes the possibility of increased risk of recurrence and no difference between treatments. There may be little to no difference regarding improvement of cosmetic outcomes between MMS and SE, judged by participants and observers 18 months post-operatively (one study; low-certainty evidence); however, no raw data were available for this outcome. When comparing imiquimod and SE for nBCC or sBCC at low-risk sites, imiquimod probably results in more recurrences than SE at three years (16.4% versus 1.6%, respectively) (RR 10.30, 95% CI 3.22 to 32.94; 1 study, 401 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and five years (17.5% versus 2.3%, respectively) (RR 7.73, 95% CI 2.81 to 21.3; 1 study, 383 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in the number of participant-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcomes (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06; 1 study, 326 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, imiquimod may result in greater numbers of good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to SE when observer-rated (60.6% versus 35.6%, respectively) (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.15; 1 study, 344 participants; low-certainty evidence). Both cosmetic outcomes were measured at three years. Based on one study of 347 participants with high- and low-risk primary BCC of the face, radiotherapy may result in more recurrences compared to SE under frozen section margin control at three years (5.2% versus 0%, respectively) (RR 19.11, 95% CI 1.12 to 325.78; low-certainty evidence) and at four years (6.4% versus 0.6%, respectively) (RR 11.06, 95% CI 1.44 to 84.77; low-certainty evidence). Radiotherapy probably results in a smaller number of good participant- (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.91; 50.3% versus 66.1%, respectively) or observer-rated (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.62; 28.9% versus 60.3%, respectively) good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to SE, when measured at four years, where dyspigmentation and telangiectasia can occur (both moderate-certainty evidence). Methyl-aminolevulinate (MAL)-PDT may result in more recurrences compared to SE at three years (36.4% versus 0%, respectively) (RR 26.47, 95% CI 1.63 to 429.92; 1 study; 68 participants with low-risk nBCC in the head and neck area; low-certainty evidence). There were no useable data for measurement at five years. MAL-PDT probably results in greater numbers of participant- (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.27; 97.3% versus 82.5%) or observer-rated (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.26; 87.1% versus 46.6%) good/excellent cosmetic outcomes at one year compared to SE (2 studies, 309 participants with low-risk nBCC and sBCC; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on moderate-certainty evidence (single low-risk sBCC), imiquimod probably results in fewer recurrences at three years compared to MAL-PDT (22.8% versus 51.6%, respectively) (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.62; 277 participants) and five years (28.6% versus 68.6%, respectively) (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.57; 228 participants). There is probably little to no difference in numbers of observer-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcomes at one year (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16; 370 participants). Participant-rated cosmetic outcomes were not measured for this comparison. AEs with surgical interventions include wound infections, graft necrosis and post-operative bleeding. Local AEs such as itching, weeping, pain and redness occur frequently with non-surgical interventions. Treatment-related AEs resulting in study modification or withdrawal occurred with imiquimod and MAL-PDT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates, and there may be slightly fewer recurrences with MMS over SE for high-risk facial primary BCC (low-certainty evidence). Non-surgical treatments, when used for low-risk BCC, are less effective than surgical treatments, but recurrence rates are acceptable and cosmetic outcomes are probably superior. Of the non-surgical treatments, imiquimod has the best evidence to support its efficacy. Overall, evidence certainty was low to moderate. Priorities for future research include core outcome measures and studies with longer-term follow-up.

Interventions to reduce Staphylococcus aureus in the management of eczema.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) can cause secondary infection in eczema, and may promote inflammation in eczema that does not look infected. There is no standard intervention to reduce S. aureus burden in eczema. It is unclear whether antimicrobial treatments help eczema or promote bacterial resistance. This is an update of a 2008 Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to reduce S. aureus for treating eczema. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to October 2018: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We searched five trials registers and three sets of conference proceedings. We checked references of trials and reviews for further relevant studies. We contacted pharmaceutical companies regarding ongoing and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of products intended to reduce S. aureus on the skin in people diagnosed with atopic eczema by a medical practitioner. Eligible comparators were a similar treatment regimen without the anti-staphylococcal agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our key outcomes were participant- or assessor-rated global improvement in symptoms/signs, quality of life (QOL), severe adverse events requiring withdrawal, minor adverse events, and emergence of antibiotic-resistant micro-organisms. MAIN RESULTS: We included 41 studies (1753 analysed participants) covering 10 treatment categories. Studies were conducted mainly in secondary care in Western Europe; North America; the Far East; and elsewhere. Twelve studies recruited children; four, adults; 19, both; and six, unclear. Fifty-nine per cent of the studies reported the mean age of participants (range: 1.1 to 34.6 years). Eczema severity ranged from mild to severe. Many studies did not report our primary outcomes. Treatment durations ranged from 10 minutes to 3 months; total study durations ranged from 15 weeks to 27 months. We considered 33 studies at high risk of bias in at least one domain. We present results for three key comparisons. All time point measurements were taken from baseline. We classed outcomes as short-term when treatment duration was less than four weeks, and long-term when treatment was given for more than four weeks. Fourteen studies evaluated topical steroid/antibiotic combinations compared to topical steroids alone (infective status: infected (two studies), not infected (four studies), unspecified (eight studies)). Topical steroid/antibiotic combinations may lead to slightly greater global improvement in good or excellent signs/symptoms than topical steroid alone at 6 to 28 days follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.21; 224 participants; 3 studies, low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between groups for QOL in children, at 14 days follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.04; 42 participants; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). The subsequent results for this comparison were based on very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of their validity: severe adverse events were rare (follow-up: between 6 to 28 days): both groups reported flare of dermatitis, worsening of the condition, and folliculitis (325 participants; 4 studies). There were fewer minor adverse events (e.g. flare, stinging, itch, folliculitis) in the combination group at 14 days follow-up (218 participants; 2 studies). One study reported antibiotic resistance in children at three months follow-up, with similar results between the groups (65 participants; 1 study). Four studies evaluated oral antibiotics compared to placebo (infective status: infected eczema (two studies), uninfected (one study), one study's participants had colonisation but no clinical infection). Oral antibiotics may make no difference in terms of good or excellent global improvement in infants and children at 14 to 28 days follow-up compared to placebo (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.18 to 3.50; 75 participants; 2 studies, low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between groups for QOL (in infants and children) at 14 days follow-up (MD 0.11, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.32, 45 participants, 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). The subsequent results for this comparison were based on very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of their validity: adverse events requiring treatment withdrawal between 14 to 28 days follow-up were very rare, but included eczema worsening (both groups), loose stools (antibiotic group), and Henoch-Schönlein purpura (placebo group) (4 studies, 199 participants). Minor adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and stomach and joint pains, at 28 days follow-up were also rare and generally low in both groups (1 study, 68 infants and children). Antibiotic resistance at 14 days was reported as similar in both groups (2 studies, 98 infants and children). Of five studies evaluating bleach baths compared to placebo (water) or bath emollient (infective status: uninfected (two studies), unspecified (three studies)), one reported global improvement and showed that bleach baths may make no difference when compared with placebo at one month follow-up (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.63; 36 participants; low-quality evidence). One study showed there is probably little or no difference in QOL at 28 days follow-up when comparing bleach baths to placebo (MD 0.90, 95% CI -1.32 to 3.12) (80 infants and children; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain if the groups differ in the likelihood of treatment withdrawals due to adverse events at two months follow-up (only one dropout reported due to worsening itch (placebo group)) as the quality of evidence was very low (1 study, 42 participants). One study reported that five participants in each group experienced burning/stinging or dry skin at two months follow-up, so there may be no difference in minor adverse events between groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.87, 36 participants, low-quality evidence). Very low-quality evidence means we are also uncertain if antibiotic resistance at four weeks follow-up is different between groups (1 study, 80 participants ≤ 18 years). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence on the effects of anti-staphylococcal treatments for treating people with infected or uninfected eczema. Low-quality evidence, due to risk of bias, imprecise effect estimates and heterogeneity, made pooling of results difficult. Topical steroid/antibiotic combinations may be associated with possible small improvements in good or excellent signs/symptoms compared with topical steroid alone. High-quality trials evaluating efficacy, QOL, and antibiotic resistance are required.

Linkage of national soil quality measurements to primary care medical records in England and Wales: a new resource for investigating environmental impacts on human health.

BACKGROUND: Long-term, low-level exposure to toxic elements in soil may be harmful to human health but large longitudinal cohort studies with sufficient follow-up time to study these effects are cost-prohibitive and impractical. Linkage of routinely collected medical outcome data to systematic surveys of soil quality may offer a viable alternative. METHODS: We used the Geochemical Baseline Survey of the Environment (G-BASE), a systematic X-ray fluorescence survey of soil inorganic chemistry throughout England and Wales to obtain estimates of the concentrations of 15 elements in the soil contained within each English and Welsh postcode area. We linked these data to the residential postcodes of individuals enrolled in The Health Improvement Network (THIN), a large database of UK primary care medical records, to provide estimates of exposure. Observed exposure levels among the THIN population were compared with expectations based on UK population estimates to assess representativeness. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-seven of three hundred ninety-five English and Welsh THIN practices agreed to participate in the linkage, providing complete residential soil metal estimates for 6,243,363 individuals (92% of all current and former patients) with a mean period of prospective computerised medical data collection (follow-up) of 6.75 years. Overall agreement between the THIN population and expectations was excellent; however, the number of participating practices in the Yorkshire & Humber strategic health authority was low, leading to restricted ranges of measurements for some elements relative to the known variations in geochemical concentrations in this area. CONCLUSIONS: The linked database provides unprecedented population size and statistical power to study the effects of elements in soil on human health. With appropriate adjustment, results should be generalizable to and representative of the wider English and Welsh population.

Probiotics for treating eczema.

BACKGROUND: Eczema is a common chronic skin condition. Probiotics have been proposed as an effective treatment for eczema; their use is increasing, as numerous clinical trials are under way. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2008, which suggested that probiotics may not be an effective treatment for eczema but identified areas in which evidence was lacking. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of probiotics for treating patients of all ages with eczema. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to January 2017: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT) database, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS). We searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also handsearched a number of conference proceedings. We updated the searches of the main databases in January 2018 and of trials registries in March 2018, but we have not yet incorporated these results into the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of probiotics (live orally ingested micro-organisms) compared with no treatment, placebo, or other active intervention with no probiotics for the treatment of eczema diagnosed by a doctor. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. We recorded adverse events from the included studies and from a separate adverse events search conducted for the first review. We formally assessed reporting bias by preparing funnel plots, and we performed trial sequential analysis for the first primary outcome - eczema symptoms at the end of active treatment.We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome (in italic font). MAIN RESULTS: We included 39 randomised controlled trials involving 2599 randomised participants. We included participants of either gender, aged from the first year of life through to 55 years (only six studies assessed adults), who had mild to severe eczema. Trials were undertaken in primary and secondary healthcare settings, mainly in Europe or Asia. Duration of treatment ranged from four weeks to six months, and duration of follow-up after end of treatment ranged from zero to 36 months. We selected no standard dose: researchers used a variety of doses and concentrations of probiotics. The probiotics used were bacteria of the Lactobacillus and Bifidobacteria species, which were taken alone or combined with other probiotics, and were given with or without prebiotics. Comparators were no treatment, placebo, and other treatments with no probiotics.For all results described in this abstract, the comparator was no probiotics. Active treatment ranged from six weeks to three months for all of the following results, apart from the investigator-rated eczema severity outcome, for which the upper limit of active treatment was 16 weeks. With regard to score, the higher the score, the more severe were the symptoms. All key results reported in this abstract were measured at the end of active treatment, except for adverse events, which were measured during the active treatment period.Probiotics probably make little or no difference in participant- or parent-rated symptoms of eczema (13 trials; 754 participants): symptom severity on a scale from 0 to 20 was 0.44 points lower after probiotic treatment (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.22 to 0.33; moderate-quality evidence). Trial sequential analysis shows that target sample sizes of 258 and 456, which are necessary to demonstrate a minimum mean difference of -2 and -1.5, respectively, with 90% power, have been exceeded, suggesting that further trials with similar probiotic strains for this outcome at the end of active treatment may be futile.We found no evidence suggesting that probiotics make a difference in QoL for patients with eczema (six studies; 552 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.03, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.42; low-quality evidence) when measured by the participant or the parent using validated disease-specific QoL instruments.Probiotics may slightly reduce investigator-rated eczema severity scores (24 trials; 1596 participants). On a scale of 0 to 103 for total Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), a score combining investigator-rated eczema severity score and participant scoring for eczema symptoms of itch and sleep loss was 3.91 points lower after probiotic treatment than after no probiotic treatment (95% CI -5.86 to -1.96; low-quality evidence). The minimum clinically important difference for SCORAD has been estimated to be 8.7 points.We noted significant to extreme levels of unexplainable heterogeneity between the results of individual studies. We judged most studies to be at unclear risk of bias; six studies had high attrition bias, and nine were at low risk of bias overall.We found no evidence to show that probiotics make a difference in the risk of adverse events during active treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.54, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.63; seven trials; 402 participants; low-quality evidence). Studies in our review that reported adverse effects described gastrointestinal symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that, compared with no probiotic, currently available probiotic strains probably make little or no difference in improving patient-rated eczema symptoms. Probiotics may make little or no difference in QoL for people with eczema nor in investigator-rated eczema severity score (combined with participant scoring for eczema symptoms of itch and sleep loss); for the latter, the observed effect was small and of uncertain clinical significance. Therefore, use of probiotics for the treatment of eczema is currently not evidence-based. This update found no evidence of increased adverse effects with probiotic use during studies, but a separate adverse events search from the first review revealed that probiotic treatment carries a small risk of adverse events.Results show significant, unexplainable heterogeneity between individual trial results. Only a small number of studies measured some outcomes.Future studies should better measure QoL scores and adverse events, and should report on new probiotics. Researchers should also consider studying subgroups of patients (e.g. patients with atopy or food allergies, adults) and standardising doses/concentrations of probiotics given.

Surgical excision versus imiquimod 5% cream for nodular and superficial basal-cell carcinoma (SINS): a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Basal-cell carcinoma is the most common form of skin cancer and its incidence is increasing worldwide. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of imiquimod cream versus surgical excision in patients with low-risk basal-cell carcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, parallel-group, pragmatic, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial at 12 centres in the UK, in which patients were recruited between June 19, 2003, and Feb 22, 2007, with 3 year follow-up from June 26, 2006, to May 26, 2010. Participants of any age were eligible if they had histologically confirmed primary nodular or superficial basal-cell carcinoma at low-risk sites. We excluded patients with morphoeic or recurrent basal-cell carcinoma and those with Gorlin syndrome. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via computer-generated blocked randomisation, stratified by centre and tumour type, to receive either imiquimod 5% cream once daily for 6 weeks (superficial) or 12 weeks (nodular), or surgical excision with a 4 mm margin. The randomisation sequence was concealed from study investigators. Because of the nature of the interventions, masking of participants was not possible and masking of outcome assessors was only partly possible. The trial statistician was masked to allocation until all analyses had been done. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with clinical success, defined as absence of initial treatment failure or signs of recurrence at 3 years from start of treatment. We used a prespecified non-inferiority margin of a relative risk (RR) of 0.87. Analysis was by a modified intention-to-treat population and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial (ISRCTN48755084), and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00066872. FINDINGS: 501 participants were randomly assigned to the imiquimod group (n=254) or the surgical excision group (n=247). At year 3, 401 (80%) patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat group. At 3 years, 178 (84%) of 213 participants in the imiquimod group were treated successfully compared with 185 (98%) of 188 participants in the surgery group (RR 0.84, 98% CI 0.78-0.91; p<0.0001). No clear difference was noted between groups in patient-assessed cosmetic outcomes. The most common adverse events were itching (211 patients in the imiquimod group vs 129 in the surgery group) and weeping (160 vs 81). We recorded serious adverse events in 99 (40%) of 249 participants in the imiquimod group and 97 (42%) of 229 in the surgery group had serious adverse events, but none were regarded as related to treatment. 12 (5%) participants in the imiquimod group withdrew because of adverse events compared with four (2%) in the surgery group. INTERPRETATION: Imiquimod was inferior to surgery according to our predefined non-inferiority criterion. Although excisional surgery remains the best treatment for low-risk basal-cell carcinoma, imiquimod cream might still be a useful treatment option for small low-risk superficial or nodular basal-cell carcinoma dependent on factors such as patient preference, size and site of the lesion, and whether the patient has more than one lesion. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

The effectiveness of virtual reality interventions in improving balance in adults with impaired balance compared with standard or no treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether virtual reality interventions, including interactive gaming systems, are effective at improving balance in adults with impaired balance. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. METHODS: Studies were identified from electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PyschINFO, PyschBITE, OTseeker, Ei Compendex, and Inspec) searched to November 2011, and repeated in November 2012. Two reviewers selected studies meeting inclusion criteria and quality of included studies assessed using a Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool. Data was pooled and a meta-analysis completed. The systematic review was reported following guidance of the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: A total of 251 articles were screened. Eight randomized control trials were included. These studies presented the results of 239 participants, with various aetiologies, and used a variety of virtual reality systems. The number of falls was documented in only one included study. Meta-analysis was completed on data from the Berg Balance Scale, walking speed, 30 second sit-to-stand test, and Timed Up and Go Test, and favoured standard therapy when compared with standard plus virtual reality interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There was a notable inconsistency in the outcome measures, experimental, and control interventions used within the included studies. The pooled results of the studies showed no significant difference. Therefore this review cannot support nor refute the use of virtual reality interventions, rather than conventional physiotherapy, to improve balance in adults with impaired balance.

Interventions for cutaneous Bowen's disease.

BACKGROUND: Bowen's disease is the clinical term for in situ squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. Cutaneous lesions present as largely asymptomatic, well-defined, scaly erythematous patches on sun-exposed skin. In general, people with Bowen's disease have an excellent prognosis because the disease is typically slow-growing and responds favourably to treatment. Lesions are persistent and can be progressive, with a small potential (estimated to be 3%) to develop into invasive squamous cell carcinoma. The relative effectiveness of the available treatments is not known for Bowen's disease, and this review attempts to address which is the most effective intervention, with the least side-effects, for cutaneous Bowen's disease. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of therapeutic interventions for cutaneous Bowen's disease. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases up to September 2012: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2012, Issue 9), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), PsycINFO (from 1806), and LILACS (from 1982). We also searched online trials registers. We checked the bibliographies of included and excluded studies and reviews, for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials assessing interventions used in Bowen's disease, preferably histologically proven. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently carried out study selection and assessment of methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measures were complete clearance of lesions after the first treatment cycle and recurrence rate at 12 months. Our secondary outcomes included the number of lesions that cleared after each treatment cycle, the number of treatment cycles needed to achieve clearance, the recurrence rates at > 12 months, cosmetic outcome, quality of life assessment, and adverse outcomes as reported by both participant and clinician.We included 9 studies, with a total of 363 participants. One study demonstrated statistically significantly greater clearance of lesions of Bowen's disease with MAL-PDT (methyl aminolevulinate with photodynamic therapy) when compared with placebo-PDT (RR (risk ratio) 1.68, 95% CI (confidence interval) 1.12 to 2.52; n = 148) or cryotherapy (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.37; n = 215), but there was no significant difference when MAL-PDT was compared to 5-FU (5-fluorouracil). One study demonstrated statistically significantly greater clearance of lesions with ALA-PDT (5-aminolevulinic acid with photodynamic therapy) versus 5-FU (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.06; n = 66), but no statistically significant difference in recurrence rates at 12 months (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.53).Cryotherapy showed no statistically significant difference in clearance rates (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.26) or recurrences at 1 year (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.53 to 4.17) when compared to 5-FU in 1 study of 127 participants.One study compared imiquimod to placebo and demonstrated statistically significantly greater clearance rates in the imiquimod group (9/15 lesions) compared to placebo (0/16) (Fisher's Exact P value < 0.001). The imiquimod group did not report any recurrences at 12 months, but at 18 months, 2/16 participants in the placebo group had developed early invasive squamous cell carcinoma. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there has been very little good-quality research on treatments for Bowen's disease. There is limited evidence from single studies to suggest MAL-PDT is an effective treatment. Although cosmetic outcomes appear favourable with PDT, five-year follow-up data are needed. Significantly more lesions cleared with MAL-PDT compared to cryotherapy. No significant difference in clearance was seen when MAL-PDT was compared with 5-FU, but one study found a significant difference in clearance in favour of ALA-PDT when compared to 5-FU. There was no significant difference in clearance when cryotherapy was compared to 5-FU.The lack of quality data for surgery and topical cream therapies has limited the scope of this review to one largely about PDT studies. The age group, number, and size of lesions and site(s) affected may all influence therapeutic choice; however, there was not enough evidence available to provide guidance on this. More studies are required in the immunosuppressed populations as different therapeutic options may be preferable. Specific recommendations cannot be made from the data in this review, so we cannot give firm conclusions about the comparative effectiveness of treatments.

Longitudinal, mixed method study to look at the experiences and knowledge of non melanoma skin cancer from diagnosis to one year.

BACKGROUND: Skin cancer is the most common type of cancer in humans and the incidence is increasing worldwide. Our objective was to understanding the needs, experiences and knowledge of individuals with Non Melanoma Skin Cancer (NMSC) from diagnosis up until one year. METHODS: Patients with NMSC completed questionnaires at diagnosis, treatment, 8 weeks post treatment and 12 months post diagnosis. Body image, psychological morbidity and Quality of Life (QOL) were assessed at each time point, with the exception of QOL that was not assessed at diagnosis. Knowledge of NMSC was assessed at baseline and 8 weeks. A sub-sample of participants was also interviewed to allow a more in-depth exploration of patients' experiences. RESULTS: 76 participants completed the initial questionnaire, of which 15 were interviewed. Patients were anxious about a diagnosis of skin cancer, however they were no more depressed or anxious than the general population. QOL significantly improved from diagnosis to 8 weeks and from diagnosis to one year. Knowledge of NMSC was poor and did not improve after treatment. Hairdressers were highlighted as playing an important role in raising awareness and encouraging individuals to seek medical help. Most participants were aware of the need to check their skin for suspicious lesions but were not sure what to look for. At one year participants had forgotten their experience and were not overly concerned about skin cancer. CONCLUSION: There is a need to raise awareness of the signs and symptoms of NMSC. Information on skin cancer needs to be tailored to the individual both at the start of treatment and during the follow up months, ensuring that participants' needs and expectations are met. Targeting education at individuals in the community who regularly come into contact with skin should help in early identification of NMSC. This is important since skin cancer caught early is easily treatable and delay in presentation leads to larger and more complex lesions which impacts in terms of increased morbidity and increased health care costs.

Dietary supplements for established atopic eczema.

BACKGROUND: Many people with atopic eczema are reluctant to use the most commonly recommended treatments because they fear the long-term health effects. As a result, many turn to dietary supplements as a possible treatment approach, often with the belief that some essential ingredient is 'missing' in their diet. Various supplements have been proposed, but it is unclear whether any of these interventions are effective. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate dietary supplements for treating established atopic eczema/dermatitis.Evening primrose oil, borage oil, and probiotics are covered in other Cochrane reviews. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases up to July 2010: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (from 2005), EMBASE (from 2007), PsycINFO (from 1806), AMED (from 1985), LILACS (from 1982), ISI Web of Science, GREAT (Global Resource of EczemA Trials) database, and reference lists of articles. We searched ongoing trials registers up to April 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of dietary supplements for the treatment of those with established atopic eczema/dermatitis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, read the full text of the publications, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 studies with a total of 596 participants. Two studies assessed fish oil versus olive oil or corn oil placebo. The following were all looked at in single studies: oral zinc sulphate compared to placebo, selenium versus selenium plus vitamin E versus placebo, vitamin D versus placebo, vitamin D versus vitamin E versus vitamins D plus vitamin E together versus placebo, pyridoxine versus placebo, sea buckthorn seed oil versus sea buckthorn pulp oil versus placebo, hempseed oil versus placebo, sunflower oil (linoleic acid) versus fish oil versus placebo, and DHA versus control (saturated fatty acids of the same energy value). Two small studies on fish oil suggest a possible modest benefit, but many outcomes were explored. A convincingly positive result from a much larger study with a publicly-registered protocol is needed before clinical practice can be influenced. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no convincing evidence of the benefit of dietary supplements in eczema, and they cannot be recommended for the public or for clinical practice at present. Whilst some may argue that at least supplements do not do any harm, high doses of vitamin D may give rise to serious medical problems, and the cost of long-term supplements may also mount up.

What determines patient preferences for treating low risk basal cell carcinoma when comparing surgery vs imiquimod? A discrete choice experiment survey from the SINS trial.

BACKGROUND: The SINS trial (Controlled Clinical Trials ISRCTN48755084; Eudract No. 2004-004506-24) is a randomised controlled trial evaluating long term success of excisional surgery vs. imiquimod 5% cream for low risk nodular and superficial basal cell carcinoma (BCC). The trial included a discrete choice experiment questionnaire to explore patient preferences of a cream versus surgery for the treatment of their skin cancer. METHODS: The self-completed questionnaire was administered at baseline to 183 participants, measuring patients' strength of preferences when choosing either alternative 'surgery' or 'imiquimod cream' instead of a fixed 'current situation' option (of surgical excision as standard practice in UK). The treatments were described according to: cost, chance of complete clearance, side effects and appearance. Participants had to choose between various scenarios. Analysis was performed using a mixed logit model, which took into account the impact of previous BCC treatment and sample preference variability. RESULTS: The analysis showed that respondents preferred 'imiquimod cream' to their 'current situation' or 'surgery', regardless of previous experience of BCC symptoms and treatment. Respondents were more likely to be worried about their cosmetic outcomes and side effects they might experience over and above their chance of clearance and cost. Those with no experience of surgery (compared with experience) valued more the choice of 'imiquimod cream' (£1013 vs £781). All treatment characteristics were significant determinants of treatment choice, and there was significant variability in the population preferences for all of them. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BCC valued more 'imiquimod cream' than alternative 'surgery' options, and all treatment characteristics were important for their choice of care. Understanding how people with a BCC value alternative interventions may better inform the development of health care interventions.

Interventions for infantile haemangiomas (strawberry birthmarks) of the skin.

BACKGROUND: Infantile haemangiomas (also known as strawberry birthmarks) are soft, raised swellings of the skin which are usually uncomplicated and tend to regress spontaneously over time. Some haemangiomas occur in high-risk areas or can develop complications; therefore, intervention may be necessary. Various interventions have been proposed, but it is unclear whether any of these interventions are effective. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for infantile haemangiomas. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases up to March 2011: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Clinical Trials) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database), CINAHL, and reference lists of articles. We also searched online trials registries for ongoing trials and grey literature. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included children with haemangiomas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and the full text of publications; extracted data; and assessed risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included 4 studies with a total of 271 participants.One randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared pulsed dye laser (PDL) therapy versus the 'wait and see' approach. At one year PDL was significantly more likely to result in complete clearance. The risk ratio (RR) was 6.10 (95% CI [confidence interval] 1.89 to 19.64); however, there was no difference when clearance was defined as 'complete or minimal residual signs'. Redness was significantly less pronounced in the PDL group, but no differences were seen for height or surface area. Significant increases in atrophy and skin hypopigmentation were seen in the PDL group.One very old RCT assessed radiation versus mock-radiation; there was no significant difference in clearance at six years (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.87) between the groups, irrespective of the size of the haemangioma and the skin colour.In one small RCT there was a significantly greater reduction in size of the haemangioma with oral prednisolone compared to intravenous methylprednisolone at three months (mean difference [MD] was 58 mm [95% CI 29.24 to 86.76]), and one year. Similar adverse events occurred in both groups.In another small RCT there was a significant reduction in the surface area of the haemangioma with bleomycin compared to the control (RR 21, 95% CI 1.34 to 328.86). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review has found limited evidence from individual RCTs to support some of the existing interventions (corticosteroid and PDL) for infantile haemangiomas. There is a need for further high-quality RCTs to validate the findings from these studies, and RCTs to assess the effect of other treatments, in particular relating to propranolol.

Teaching tools in evidence based practice: evaluation of reusable learning objects (RLOs) for learning about meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: All healthcare students are taught the principles of evidence based practice on their courses. The ability to understand the procedures used in systematically reviewing evidence reported in studies, such as meta-analysis, are an important element of evidence based practice. Meta-analysis is a difficult statistical concept for healthcare students to understand yet it is an important technique used in systematic reviews to pool data from studies to look at combined effectiveness of treatments. In other areas of the healthcare curricula, by supplementing lectures, workbooks and workshops with pedagogically designed, multimedia learning objects (known as reusable learning objects or RLOs) we have shown an improvement in students' perceived understanding in subjects they found difficult. In this study we describe the development and evaluation of two RLOs on meta-analysis. The RLOs supplement associated lectures and aim to improve students' understanding of meta-analysis in healthcare students. METHODS: Following a quality controlled design process two RLOs were developed and delivered to two cohorts of students, a Master in Public Health course and Postgraduate diploma in nursing course. Students' understanding of five key concepts of Meta-analysis were measured before and after a lecture and again after RLO use. RLOs were also evaluated for their educational value, learning support, media attributes and usability using closed and open questions. RESULTS: Students rated their understanding of meta-analysis as improved after a lecture and further improved after completing the RLOs (Wilcoxon paired test, p < 0.01 in all cases) Whilst the media components of the RLOs such as animations helped most students (86%) understand concepts including for example Forest plots, 93% of students rated usability and control as important to their learning. A small number of students stated they needed the support of a lecturer alongside the RLOs (7% 'Agreed' and 21% 'Neutral'). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis RLOs that are openly accessible and unrestricted by usernames and passwords provide flexible support for students who find the process of meta-analysis difficult.

Interventions for non-metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the skin.

BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common skin cancer, and is becoming increasingly common around the world. Left untreated, it may spread to other parts of the body, and, although the risk is low, it may ultimately lead to death. Surgical excision is the first line of treatment for most skin SCCs, although other forms of treatment are also used depending upon the nature and site of the tumour and individual participant factors. A multi-professional approach is therefore required for the management of people with this condition. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of treatments for primary non-metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. SEARCH STRATEGY: In February 2010 we searched for relevant trials in The Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2010), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, LILACS, and the ongoing trials registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for primary SCC of the skin. Inclusion criteria were: adults with one or more histologically proven primary SCCs of the skin which had not metastasised. The primary outcome measures were time to recurrence one to five years after treatment, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes included early treatment failure within six months, number of adverse events by the end of treatment, aesthetic appearance as assessed by the participant and clinician, discomfort to the participant during and after treatment, and death. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors (LL, FB-H) independently carried out study selection and assessment of methodological quality and data extraction. MAIN RESULTS: One trial involving 65 people was included. This compared the time to recurrence in participants with aggressive skin SCC who were randomised to receive either adjuvant 13-cis-retinoic acid and interferon alpha after surgery with or without radiation treatment, or no adjuvant therapy after their initial treatment. There was no significant difference in time to recurrence of tumour between the two groups (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% confidence intervals 0.43 to 2.72).Most studies identified from the searches were excluded as they were either uncontrolled case series, did not include participants with invasive primary SCC, or included only participants with recurrent or metastatic disease. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Little evidence from RCTs comparing the efficacy of different interventions for primary cutaneous SCCs exists. There is a clear need for well-designed randomised studies in order to improve the evidence base for the management of this condition.

Interventions to reduce Staphylococcus aureus in the management of atopic eczema.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus can cause secondary infection in atopic eczema, and it may promote inflammation in eczema that does not look infected. Many antimicrobial products exist for eczema, but it is unclear if they work or if they promote bacterial resistance. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to reduce Staphylococcus aureus for treating infected or uninfected atopic eczema. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (March 2008), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2008), MEDLINE (OVID) (from 2002 to March 2008), EMBASE (OVID) (from 2002 to March 2008), Ongoing trials registers (March 2008). References from trials and reviews were searched, pharmaceutical companies were contacted for unpublished trials. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with atopic eczema who have been treated with a product intended to reduce S. aureus on the skin. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two people independently performed the study selection, data abstraction and quality assessment. MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 studies (1018 participants) covering 7 treatment categories. Most studies were poorly reported and study differences limited pooling of results. Adverse effects were especially poorly reported, and only one study reported the emergence of resistant bacterial strains following oral antibiotics. Oral antibiotics were not associated with benefit in non-infected (2 trials, 66 participants) or infected eczema (1 trial, 33 participants). We did not find any benefit for antibacterial soaps (1 trial, 50 participants), or antibacterial bath additives (2 trials, 41 participants), or topical antibiotics/antiseptics (4 studies, 95 participants). Adding antibiotics to topical corticosteroids reduced numbers of Staphylococcus aureus in 4 trials (302 participants), but there was no evidence of any clinical benefit in 9 trials involving 677 participants: betamethasone plus neomycin vs clobetasol (MD 1.2; 95% CI 0.25, 2.15), prednicarbate plus antimicrobial vs prednicarbate (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.25, 1.68), or betamethasone valerate plus gentamicin vs betamethasone (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.07, 1.35). One trial (30 participants) showed no significant improvement in eczema for those using silver textiles (RR 2.67; 95% CI 0.98, 7.22), despite using 10 times the amount of topical steroids. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We failed to find clear evidence of benefit for antimicrobial interventions for people with atopic eczema, despite their widespread use. This does not necessarily mean they do not work because the studies were small and poorly reported. Further large studies with long-term outcomes and clearly defined participants are urgently required.

Probiotics for treating eczema.

BACKGROUND: Probiotics have been proposed as an effective treatment for eczema, and recently a number of clinical trials have been undertaken. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of probiotics for the treatment of eczema SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (to April 2008), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2,2008) MEDLINE (from 2003 to April 2008), EMBASE (from 2005 to April 2008), PsycINFO, AMED and LILACS (from inception to April 2008) and ISI Web of Science (to December 2006) and reference lists of articles. We also searched registries of ongoing clinical trials, conference proceedings and searched for adverse events. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of live orally ingested microorganisms for the treatment of eczema. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently applied eligibility criteria, assessed the quality of trials and extracted data. We contacted study authors for more information where necessary. We recorded adverse events from the included studies, and from the separate adverse events search. MAIN RESULTS: Twelve randomised controlled trials involving 781 participants met the inclusion criteria. All trial participants were children. There was no significant difference in participant or parent-rated symptom scores in favour of probiotic treatment (5 trials, 313 participants). Symptom severity on a scale from 0 to 20 was 0.90 points lower after probiotic treatment than after placebo (95%CI -1.04, 2.84; p = 0.36).There was also no significant difference in participant or parent-rated overall eczema severity in favour of probiotic treatment (3 trials, 150 participants). There was no significant difference in investigator rated eczema severity between probiotic and placebo treatments (7 trials, 588 participants). On a scale from 0 to 102 investigator rated eczema severity was 2.46 points lower after probiotic treatment than after placebo treatment (95%CI -2.53, 7.45 p = 0.33). Significant heterogeneity was noted between the results of individual studies, which may be explained by the use of different probiotic strains. Subgroup analysis by age of participant, severity of eczema, presence of atopy or presence of food allergy did not identify a population with different treatment outcomes to the population as a whole. The adverse events search identified some case reports of infections and bowel ischaemia caused by probiotics. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that probiotics are not an effective treatment for eczema, and probiotic treatment carries a small risk of adverse events.

Pharmacology education for nurse prescribing students - a lesson in reusable learning objects.

BACKGROUND: The shift away from a biological science to a social science model of nursing care has resulted in a reduction in pharmacology knowledge and understanding in pre-registration nursing students. This has a significant impact on nurse prescribing training where pharmacology is a critical component of the course from a patient safety perspective. METHODS: Reusable learning objects (RLOs) are electronic resources based on a single learning objective which use high quality graphics and audio to help engagement with the material and to facilitate learning. This study used questionnaire data from three successive cohorts of nurse prescribing students (n = 84) to evaluate the use of RLOs focussed around pharmacology concepts to promote the understanding of these concepts in students. A small number of students (n = 10) were followed up by telephone interview one year after qualification to gain further insight into students' perceptions of the value of RLOs as an educational tool. RESULTS: Students' perceptions of their own understanding of pharmacology concepts increased substantially following the introduction of RLOs to supplement the pharmacology component of the course. Student evaluation of the RLOs themselves was extremely positive with a number of students continuing to access these tools post-qualification. CONCLUSION: The use of RLOs to support the pharmacology component of nurse prescribing courses successfully resulted in a perceived increase in pharmacology understanding, with some students directly implicating these educational tools in developing confidence in their own prescribing abilities.

Validation of THIN data for non-melanoma skin cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database began in 2003. It consists of anonymised records from over 300 general practice computer systems and is likely to be valuable for research, planning and strategic issues in health care, but it is important to establish completeness and accuracy of the data. AIM: To investigate the validity of THIN data for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC). We defined NMSC as basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: Using Read codes we extracted THIN database records of first-recorded diagnoses of NMSC from 1 January 1996 to 31 December 2003. Searches for SCC were unable to distinguish between skin tumours of this type, and SCC at any other site. From our dataset for BCC, 40 patient records were selected at random, and a questionnaire sent to their corresponding practice, asking if they had been referred to hospital/dermatology clinic, and how the diagnosis of BCC had been confirmed. RESULTS: All the patients in the sample were referred to a hospital or dermatology clinic: 37/40 (93%) had the diagnosis of BCC confirmed, either by a letter from the hospital or a pathology report, a finding that we have reported previously. One patient's diagnosis was confirmed as SCC, and the other two either died or moved away before diagnosis could be confirmed. The 38 patients with diagnoses confirmed were all treated in hospital or dermatology clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Data for BCC are sufficiently accurate for research. It is also likely that these data will prove valuable for quality management. It is not possible currently to obtain accurate data for SCC of the skin from the THIN database. This seems not to be a problem with the THIN database itself, but attributable to the Read coding scheme being, in practice, unable to allow differentiation between SCCs of different organs.

Long-term topical corticosteroid use and risk of skin cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize available research evidence to determine the risk of skin cancer in patients with long-term use of topical corticosteroids (TCS). INTRODUCTION: Topical corticosteroids are one of the most commonly prescribed medicines in dermatology and the mainstay of the treatment of atopic dermatitis and other skin conditions such as psoriasis. They are often required for months or years to control the disease and ultimately restore patients' quality of life. In some patients, TCS may have a local immunosuppressive effect and theoretically increase the risk of skin cancer, whilst on the other hand TCS may decrease the risk of skin cancer in patients where TCS are used to treat inflammatory skin disease. To date, no systematic review has been performed to collate evidence on the effect of long-term TCS use on the risk of skin cancer. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review considered studies that included people of all ages, genders and ethnicities, including HIV and transplant participants or participants with genetic diseases (for example, Gorlin-Goltz syndrome) This review considered studies that evaluated long-term use of topical corticosteroids. "Long-term" was defined as using TCS more than once a week for a month or longer. The review included cohort, cross-sectional and case-control observational studies exploring the association between the stated intervention and outcomes. The primary outcome measures of interest were: non-melanoma skin cancer (keratinocyte carcinoma), cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSSC), basal cell carcinoma (BCC) or melanoma skin cancer. Genital and oral skin cancers are considered to be slightly different so we did not include them in this review. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS on November 9, 2017 to identify observational epidemiological studies assessing the association between long-term TCS use and skin cancer. We also searched EThOS at the British Library and three drug safety databases to identify unpublished work. The titles, abstracts and full text identified from the search were assessed independently by two authors against pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria. Methodological quality was not assessed as no articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction was not possible as no articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. It was not possible to complete data synthesis as no articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 1703 potentially relevant studies were identified following a comprehensive electronic search. After abstract and title screening, 51 full texts were assessed for eligibility criteria. Of these, no study met the inclusion criteria. No additional records were identified from searching unpublished literature. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any studies that could help us establish if long-term TCS use is associated with skin cancer. Future research using primary care databases might give a better understanding regarding long-term use of TCS and skin cancer.

Interventions for healthcare professionals, organizations and patients to enhance quality of life for people diagnosed with palliative esophagogastric cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastric (EG) cancer is the fifth most common malignancy, and its incidence is increasing. The disease is fast paced, and five-year survival rates are poor. Treatment with palliative intent is provided for the majority of patients but there remains a lack of empirical evidence into the most effective service models to support EG cancer patients. OBJECTIVES: The overall objective of this quantitative systematic review was to establish best practice in relation to interventions targeted at healthcare professionals or the structures in which healthcare professionals deliver care (i.e. models of care and practice) and patients (diagnosed with palliative EG cancer) to enhance the quality of life for people diagnosed with palliative EG cancer. INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: The current review considered studies that included patients diagnosed with palliative EG cancer and any health professionals involved in the delivery of palliative care to this patient group in a hospital, home or community setting. TYPES OF INTERVENTION: The current review considered studies that evaluated any intervention or combination of intervention strategies aimed at healthcare professionals, organizations or patients to improve quality of life for people diagnosed with palliative EG cancer. TYPES OF STUDIES: The current review considered both experimental and epidemiological study designs. Studies were excluded that evaluated: screening programs, pharmacology alone, palliative oncology and palliative endoscopy. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was objectively measured quality of life. SEARCH STRATEGY: A three-step search strategy was utilized. Sixteen databases were searched for papers from the year 2000 onward and followed by hand searching of reference lists. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was not assessed as no articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was not possible as no articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: It was not possible to complete data synthesis as no articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Comprehensive searching and study selection process failed to identify any studies that were eligible for inclusion in the review. CONCLUSION: There is currently a lack of published evidence to establish which interventions and strategies are most effective in delivering services to patients diagnosed with palliative EG cancer in terms of service structure, process and delivery.