Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Br J Dermatol. 2018 Oct 17. doi: 10.1111/bjd.17311. [Epub ahead of print]

5-aminolaevulinic acid nanoemulsion is more effective than methyl-5-aminolaevulinate in daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: a nonsponsored randomized double-blind multicentre trial.

Author information

1
Department of Dermatology, Joint Authority for Päijät-Häme Health and Wellbeing, Lahti, Finland.
2
Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
3
Departments of Pathology and Dermatology, Institutes of Biomedicine and Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
4
Department of Dermatology, Vaasa Central Hospital, Vaasa, Finland.
5
Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
6
Faculty of Social Sciences (Health Sciences), University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
7
Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority of Finland (STUK), Helsinki, Finland.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Daylight photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) with methyl-5-aminolaevulinate (MAL) is an effective treatment for mild and moderate actinic keratosis (AK).

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the clinical efficacy, tolerability and cost-effectiveness of 5-aminolaevulinic acid nanoemulsion (BF-200 ALA) compared with MAL in DL-PDT for grade I-II AKs.

METHODS:

This nonsponsored, prospective randomized double-blind multicentre trial included 69 patients with 767 grade I-II AKs located symmetrically on the face or scalp. A single DL-PDT was given in a randomized split-face design. The primary outcome was clearance of the AKs at 12 months as assessed by a blinded observer. The secondary outcomes were pain, treatment reactions, cosmetic outcome and the cost-effectiveness of the therapy.

RESULTS:

In the per-patient (half-face) analysis, clearance was better for the BF-200 ALA sides than for those treated with MAL (P = 0·008). In total, BF-200 ALA cleared 299/375 AKs (79·7%) and MAL 288/392 (73·5%) (P = 0·041). The treatment was practically painless with both photosensitizers, the mean pain visual analogue scale being 1·51 for BF-200 ALA and 1·35 for MAL (P = 0·061). Twenty-six patients had a stronger skin reaction on the BF-200 ALA side, seven on the MAL side and 23 displayed no difference (P = 0·001). The cosmetic outcome was excellent or good in > 90% of cases with both photosensitizers (P = 1·000). The cost-effectiveness plane showed that the costs of DL-PDT were similar for both photosensitizers, but the effectiveness was slightly higher for BF-200 ALA.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our results indicate that BF-200 ALA is more effective than MAL in DL-PDT for grade I-II AKs. BF-200 ALA provides slightly better value for money than MAL.

PMID:
30329163
DOI:
10.1111/bjd.17311

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center