 |
 |

Photodynamic Therapy Using Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate vs Surgery for Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma
Results of a Multicenter Randomized Prospective Trial
Lesley E. Rhodes, MD, FRCP;
Menno de Rie, MD;
Ylva Enström, MD;
Richard Groves, FRCP;
Tore Morken, MD;
Victoria Goulden, MRCP;
Gavin A. E. Wong, MRCP;
Jean-Jacques Grob, MD;
Sandeep Varma, MRCP;
Peter Wolf, MD
Arch Dermatol. 2004;140:17-23.
Background Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is increasingly used as a noninvasive treatment for nodular basal cell carcinoma (BCC), without a sound evidence base.
Objective To compare topical PDT, with the use of the sensitizer methyl aminolevulinate, and standard excision surgery in nodular BCC.
Design Prospective, randomized study.
Setting University dermatology departments.
Patients A total of 101 adults with previously untreated nodular BCC.
Interventions Patients received methyl aminolevulinate PDT (n = 52) or surgery (n = 49). The PDT was given twice, 7 days apart, with methyl aminolevulinate cream (160 mg/g) and 75 J/cm2 red light (570-670 nm). Thirteen patients with a noncomplete response to PDT at 3 months (24% lesions) were retreated.
Outcome Measures Primary end point was clinically assessed lesion clearance at 3 months after treatment. Secondary end points were sustained response rate at 12 months and cosmetic outcome at 3 and 12 months. Cosmesis and lesion recurrence were further assessed at 24 months.
Results Data from 97 patients (105 lesions) were included in the 3-month per-protocol analysis. Complete response rates did not differ significantly between groups (51/52 [98%] lesions with surgery vs 48/53 [91%] lesions with methyl aminolevulinate PDT; difference [95% confidence interval], 4.8% (-3.4% to 13.0%]; P = .25). At 12 months, tumor-free rates were 50 (96%) of 52 lesions with surgery vs 44 (83%) of 53 with methyl aminolevulinate PDT (P = .15). More patients treated with methyl aminolevulinate PDT than surgery had an excellent or good cosmetic outcome at all time points (significant at 12 and 24 months on patient assessment, P<.05, and at 3, 12, and 24 months on investigator evaluation, P<.001). At 24 months, 5 lesions that had initially cleared with methyl aminolevulinate PDT had recurred, compared with 1 after surgery.
Conclusions Methyl aminolevulinate PDT is an effective treatment for nodular BCC, and while there is a trend for higher recurrence with this modality, it conveys the advantage over surgery of better cosmesis.
From the Departments of Dermatology, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, England (Drs Rhodes and Wong), Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Dr de Rie), and Norra Älvsborgs Länssjukhus, Trollhättan, Sweden (Dr Enström); Centre of Dermatology, University College London, London, England (Dr Groves); Departments of Dermatology, Haukeland Hospital, Bergen, Norway (Dr Morken), Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, England (Dr Goulden), Hôpital Sainte-Marguerite, Marseille, France (Dr Grob), University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, Wales (Dr Varma), and University of Graz, Graz, Austria (Dr Wolf); and Photobiology Unit, Dermatology Centre, University of Manchester, Hope Hospital, Salford, England (Dr Rhodes). The authors have no relevant financial interest in this article.
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Photodynamic Therapy for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancerand More?
Colin A. Morton
Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(1):116-120.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Photodynamic Therapy of Multiple Nonmelanoma Skin Cancers With Verteporfin and Red LightEmitting Diodes: Two-Year Results Evaluating Tumor Response and Cosmetic Outcomes
Harvey Lui, Lori Hobbs, Whitney D. Tope, Peter K. Lee, Craig Elmets, Nathalie Provost, Agnes Chan, Herma Neyndorff, Xiang Yao Su, Hem Jain, Iltefat Hamzavi, David McLean, and Robert Bissonnette
Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(1):26-32.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Trial of Short Incubation, Broad-Area Photodynamic Therapy for Facial Actinic Keratoses and Diffuse Photodamage
Dany Touma, Mina Yaar, Sara Whitehead, Nellie Konnikov, and Barbara A. Gilchrest
Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(1):33-40.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Photodynamic Therapy With Aminolevulinic Acid Topical Solution and Visible Blue Light in the Treatment of Multiple Actinic Keratoses of the Face and Scalp: Investigator-Blinded, Phase 3, Multicenter Trials
Daniel J. Piacquadio, Diana M. Chen, Harold F. Farber, Joseph F. Fowler, Jr, Scott D. Glazer, J. John Goodman, Luciann L. Hruza, Edward W. B. Jeffes, Mark R. Ling, Tania J. Phillips, Tena M. Rallis, Richard K. Scher, Charles R. Taylor, and Gerald David Weinstein
Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(1):41-46.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
 |
Pathologic Changes After Photodynamic Therapy for Basal Cell Carcinoma and Bowen Disease: A Histologic and Immunohistochemical Investigation
Fantini et al.
Arch Dermatol 2008;144:186-194.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Five-Year Follow-up of a Randomized, Prospective Trial of Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate Photodynamic Therapy vs Surgery for Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma
Rhodes et al.
Arch Dermatol 2007;143:1131-1136.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Photodynamic Therapy in Oncology
Triesscheijn et al.
The Oncologist 2006;11:1034-1044.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Comparison of topical methyl aminolevulinate photodynamic therapy with cryotherapy or Fluorouracil for treatment of squamous cell carcinoma in situ: results of a multicenter randomized trial.
Morton et al.
Arch Dermatol 2006;142:729-735.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Basal-Cell Carcinoma.
Rubin et al.
NEJM 2005;353:2262-2269.
FULL TEXT
Treatment of Diffuse Basal Cell Carcinomas and Basaloid Follicular Hamartomas in Nevoid Basal Cell Carcinoma Syndrome by Wide-Area 5-Aminolevulinic Acid Photodynamic Therapy
Oseroff et al.
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:60-67.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Interventions for basal cell carcinoma of the skin: systematic review
Bath-Hextall et al.
BMJ 2004;329:705.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Methyl Aminolevulinate PDT for Basal Cell Carcinoma
Journal Watch Dermatology 2004;2004:3-3.
FULL TEXT
Photodynamic Therapy for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer--and More?
Morton
Arch Dermatol 2004;140:116-120.
FULL TEXT
|