Risk Stratification: Should All Actinic Keratoses in All Patients Be Treated?
Purpose of Review
Actinic keratoses (AKs) are foci of dysplastic keratinocytes in the epidermis. They are markers of both photodamage and risk of keratinocyte carcinoma (KC) formation. Individual AKs are thought to progress to KC uncommonly, although they arise from the same UV-induced mutations which give rise to KC. Thus, the rationale for treatment of AKs is to reduce the risk of KC formation since AKs are not dangerous in themselves. An estimated $1.68 billion is spent on treatment of AKs in the United States annually. Treatment of a region of skin (e.g., face, scalp, or forearms) to clear AKs is termed field treatment. Though field treatment of AKs and actinic damage has been associated with a reduction in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC), it is unclear to what degree treatment of individual lesions positively impacts health.
The presence of AKs has been correlated with formation of KC, particularly CSCC. Field treatment can be accomplished by topical therapy [photodynamic therapy (PDT), topical 5-fluorouracil, ingenol mebutate, imiquimod, and/or sunscreen] or oral systemic therapy including nicotinamide or retinoids (i.e., acitretin, isotretinoin). Field treatments have been associated with a reduction in KC and therefore are likely cost-effective. However, there is a lack of data showing that treatment of individual AK lesions (usually accomplished via cryotherapy) reduces KC. Although cryotherapy is only associated with a 4% sustained clearance rate at 1 year, more than three times the amount of money is spent on cryotherapy as compared to topical therapy in Medicare patients.
Field treatment is superior to cryotherapy for reduction of KC. However, it requires high patient compliance and increasingly entails high out-of-pocket expenses for patients. Since field-directed and systemic therapies of AKs reduce KC formation, allocation of resources should be directed toward these modalities. Efforts should be made to improve patient access to field treatments by increased reimbursement for photodynamic therapy (both standard and daylight), reduction of out-of-pocket expenses for topical treatments and retinoids, and increased use of nicotinamide in patients with field actinic damage.
KeywordsActinic keratosis Keratinocytic carcinoma Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma Field therapy Cryotherapy
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance
- 14.• Levine DE, Karia PS, Schmults CD. Outcomes of patients with multiple cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas: a 10-year single-institution cohort study. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1220–5. A retrospective cohort study of primary CSCC found that the 10-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence and nodal metastasis is higher in patients with 2 to 9 CSCCs and markedly higher in those with 10 or more tumors compared with patients with a history of 1 CSCC. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Krawtchenko N, Roewert-Huber J, Ulrich M, Mann I, Sterry W, Stockfleth E. A randomised study of topical 5% imiquimod vs. topical 5-fluorouracil vs. cryosurgery in immunocompetent patients with actinic keratoses: a comparison of clinical and histological outcomes including 1-year follow-up. Br J Dermatol. 2007;157(Suppl 2):34–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Werner RN, Jacobs A, Rosumeck S, Erdmann R, Sporbeck B, Nast A. Methods and Results Report—Evidence and consensus-based (S3) Guidelines for the Treatment of Actinic Keratosis—International League of Dermatological Societies in cooperation with the European Dermatology Forum. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2015;29:e1–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Morton C, Horn M, Leman J, Tack B, Bedane C, Tjioe M, et al. 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. Arch Dermatol. 2006;142:729–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.• Pomerantz H, et al. Long-term efficacy of topical fluorouracil cream, 5%, for treating actinic keratosis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:952–60. A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial of 5% fluorouracil cream twice a day for 4 weeks compared to vehicle showed that the fluorouracil group had significantly fewer AKs at 6 months and 2.6 years. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 28.• Weinstock MA TS, Siegel JA, Marcolivio K, Means AD, Leader NF, Shaw FM, et al. Chemoprevention of basal and squamous cell carcinoma with a single course of fluorouracil, 5%, cream: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.3631. A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial of 5% fluorouracil cream twice a day for 2 or 4 weeks compared to vehicle found a 75% risk reduction in CSCC formation in the fluoruracil group.
- 30.• Ulrich C, et al. Prevention of non-melanoma skin cancer in organ transplant patients by regular use of a sunscreen: a 24 months, prospective, case-control study. Br J Dermatol. 2009;161(Suppl 3):78–84. A matched prospective cohort study of regular sunscreen use in organ transplant recipients found reduction in AKs and CSCC in the sunscreen group. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Kadakia KC, Barton DL, Loprinzi CL, Sloan JA, Otley CC, Diekmann BB, et al. Randomized controlled trial of acitretin versus placebo in patients at high-risk for basal cell or squamous cell carcinoma of the skin (North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study 969251). Cancer. 2012;118:2128–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Bavinck JN, Tieben LM, van der Woude FJ, Tegzess AM, Hermans J, ter Schegget J, et al. Prevention of skin cancer and reduction of keratotic skin lesions during acitretin therapy in renal transplant recipients: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1933–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 44.Song H, Adamson AS, Mostaghimi A. Trends in Medicare spending on topical immunomodulators and chemotherapies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2017.07.056.
- 46.Karia PS, Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Harrington DP, Murphy GF, Qureshi AA, Schmults CD. Evaluation of American Joint Committee on Cancer, International Union Against Cancer, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital tumor staging for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:327–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar