Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Conventional photodynamic therapy (PDT) can be inconvenient and uncomfortable. We studied low irradiance PDT using an ambulatory inorganic light-emitting diode. METHODS: Fifty-three patients with 61 lesions [superficial basal cell carcinoma (n = 30), Bowen's disease (n = 30), and actinic keratosis (AK; n = 1)] were studied. Two treatments of ambulatory PDT were undertaken 1 week apart (one treatment for AK). Clinical response was determined at 3 months, and the treatment cycle was repeated if there was residual disease. The endpoints assessed were pain during treatment (numerical rating scale (NRS); 0-10) and outcome at 1 year. Twenty-three of these patients also received conventional PDT to separate lesions. RESULTS: The median NRS pain scores during first and second treatment were 2 (range 0-9) and 4 (0-9), respectively. Lesion clearance rate at 1 year after ambulatory PDT was 84% (21/25 lesions in 22 patients). Of the twenty-three patients treated with both ambulatory and conventional PDT, the median NRS was 1 (0-7) and 5 (1.5-9), respectively, with most patients preferring ambulatory PDT. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory PDT is effective for superficial non-melanoma skin cancer, with 1 year clearance rates comparative to conventional PDT. Low irradiance ambulatory PDT may be less painful and more convenient than conventional PDT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ibbotson et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: