Abstract
Background
Actinic keratosis (AK) is the most common pre-malignant cutaneous lesion of the skin, often associated with field cancerization. Daylight photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) is used as treatment, showing good histological results. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) may be useful as a non-invasive, real-time approach to monitor treatment, however, there is a lack of data on the correlation between RCM and histopathological findings in AK patients treated with DL-PDT.
Objectives
To correlate histological and RCM findings and evaluate the efficacy of DL-PDT in patients with AK and field cancerization treated with DL-PDT.
Materials & Methods
Patients with field cancerization and a minimum of six AK lesions on the face were included in the study. A single session combining methyl aminolevulinate followed by two-hour daylight exposure of the face was performed. RCM and biopsy were performed before and after three months of the intervention to compare efficacy between patients using the Wilcoxon test, and concordance of the findings based on the different methods was analysed using the Kappa test.
Results
Twenty-four patients completed the study. An improvement in photodamage and a decrease in the number of AK lesions (45.3% reduction) was observed. Regression in atypia and dysplasia was observed via histopathology and RCM, however, there was poor agreement between the methods. No changes were observed after treatment for inflammation, fibroplasia and acantholysis.
Conclusion
Concordance between histological and RCM findings was poor, suggesting that RCM cannot replace the histopathological examination, however, it may be used as an adjuvant test for follow-up of patients. Despite this, DL-PDT proved to be an effective method for treating AK.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Glogau RG. The risk of progression to invasive disease. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 42 (1 Pt 2): 23–4.
Tan JM, Lambie D, Sinnya S, et al. Histopathology and reflectance confocal microscopy features of photodamaged skin and actinic keratosis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2016; 30: 1901–11.
Torezan LAR, Festa-Neto C. Cutaneous field cancerization: clinical, histopathological and therapeutic aspects. An Bras Dermatol 2013; 88: 775–86.
Nguyen M, Sandhu SS, Sivamani RK. Clinical utility of daylight photodynamic therapy in the treatment of actinic keratosis - a review of the literature. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2019; 12: 427–35.
Kessel D, Luo Y. Delayed oxidative photodamage induced by photodynamic therapy. Photochem Photobiol 1996; 64: 601–4.
Freeman M, Vinciullo C, Francis D, et al. A comparison of photodynamic therapy using topical methyl aminolevulinate (Metvix) with single cycle cryotherapy in patients with actinic keratosis: a prospective, randomized study. J Dermatolog Treat 2003; 14: 99–106.
Braathen LR, Szeimies RM, Basset-Seguin N, et al. Guidelines on the use of photodynamic therapy for nonmelanoma skin cancer: an international consensus. International Society for Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology, 2005. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007; 56: 125–43.
Morton CA, Szeimies RM, Sidoroff A, Braathen LR. European guidelines for topical photodynamic therapy part 1: treatment delivery and current indications - actinic keratoses, Bowen’s disease, basal cell carcinoma. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2013; 27: 536–44.
Morton CA, Szeimies RM, Basset-Séguin N, et al. European Dermatology Forum guidelines on topical photodynamic therapy 2019 Part 2: emerging indications - field cancerization, photorejuvenation and inflammatory/infective dermatoses. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2020; 34: 17–29.
Mukherjee S, Date A, Patravale V, Korting HC, Roeder A, Weindl G. Retinoids in the treatment of skin aging: an overview of clinical efficacy and safety. Clin Interv Aging 2006; 1: 327–48.
Wollina U, Payne CR. Aging well—the role of minimally invasive aesthetic dermatological procedures in women over 65. J Cosmet Dermatol 2010; 9: 50–8.
Calzavara-Pinton P, Longo C, Venturini M, Sala R, Pellacani G. Reflectance confocal microscopy for in vivo skin imaging. Photochem Photobiol 2008; 84: 1421–30.
Dover JS, Bhatia AC, Stewart B, Arndt KA. Topical 5-aminolevulinic acid combined with intense pulsed light in the treatment of photoaging. Arch Dermatol 2005; 141: 1247–52.
Quaedvlieg PJF, Tirsi E, Thissen MRTM, Krekels GA. Actinic keratosis: how to differentiate the good from the bad ones? Eur J Dermatol 2006; 16: 335–9.
Wiegell SR, Fabricius S, Stender IM, et al. A randomized, multicentre study of directed daylight exposure times of 1½ vs. 2½ h in daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy with methyl aminolaevulinate in patients with multiple thin actinic keratoses of the face and scalp. Br J Dermatol 2011; 164: 1083–90.
De Berker D, McGregor JM, Hughes BR. Guidelines for the management of actinic keratoses. Br J Dermatol 2007; 156: 222–30.
Szeimies RM, Torezan L, Niwa A, et al. Clinical, histopathological and immunohistochemical assessment of human skin field cancerization before and after photodynamic therapy. Br J Dermatol 2012; 167: 150–9.
Wiegell SR, Hædersdal M, Philipsen PA, Eriksen P, Enk CD, Wulf HC. Continuous activation of PpIX by daylight is as effective as and less painful than conventional photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses; a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study. Br J Dermatol 2008; 158: 740–6.
Grinblat BM, Festa Neto C, Sanches JA, Szeimies RM, Oliveira AP, Torezan LAR. Daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses in São Paulo, Brazil Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2015; 31: 54–6.
Seyed Jafari SM, Timchik T, Hunger RE. In vivo confocal microscopy efficacy assessment of daylight photodynamic therapy in actinic keratosis patients. Br J Dermatol 2016; 175: 375–81.
Guida S, Galimberti MG, Bencini M, Pellacani G, Bencini PL. Treatment of striae distensae with non-ablative fractional laser: clinical and in vivo microscopic documentation of treatment efficacy. Lasers Med Sci 2018; 33: 75–8.
Longo C, Galimberti M, De Pace B, Pellacani G, Bencini PL. Laser skin rejuvenation: epidermal changes and collagen remodeling evaluated by in vivo confocal microscopy. Lasers Med Sci 2013; 28: 769–76.
Borsari S, Pampena R, Lallas A, et al. Clinical indications for use of reflectance confocal microscopy for skin cancer diagnosis. JAMA Dermatol 2016; 152: 1093–8.
Shahriari N, Grant-Kels JM, Rabinovitz H, Oliviero M, Scope A. Reflectance confocal microscopy: principles, basic terminology, clinical indications, limitations, and practical considerations. J Am Acad Dermatol 2021; 84: 1–14.
Gupta AK, Paquet M. Network meta-analysis of the outcome “participant complete clearance” in nonimmunosuppressed participants of eight interventions for actinic keratosis: a follow-up on a Cochrane review. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169: 250–9.
Wiegell SR, Wulf HC, Szeimies RM, et al. Daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: an international consensus: International Society for Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2012; 26: 673–9.
Szeimies RM, Karrer S, Radakovic-Fijan S, et al. Photodynamic therapy using topical methyl 5-aminolevulinate compared with cryotherapy for actinic keratosis: a prospective, randomized study. J Am Acad Dermatol 2002; 47: 258–62.
Wulf HC, Pavel S, Stender I, Ahb Bakker-Wensveen C. Topical photodynamic therapy for prevention of new skin lesions in renal transplant recipients. Acta Derm Venereol 2006; 86: 25–8.
Acknowledgments
we thank Josy Davidson for editorial assistance.
Funding
Financial support none.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest none
About this article
Cite this article
Bandeira De Melo Cavalcante, R., Yuriko Sakai Valente, N., Silva Ferreira, P. et al. Assessment of reflectance confocal microscopy for monitoring treatment of actinic keratosis and field cancerization with daylight photodynamic therapy. Eur J Dermatol 33, 674–679 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1684/ejd.2023.4579
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1684/ejd.2023.4579