Long-Term Evaluation of Recurrence after Photodynamic Therapy with Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate for Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer: a Hospital-Based Study

Introduction & Objectives: Several factors may influence the decision to pursue nonsurgical modalities for the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancer. Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a non-invasive alternative treatment reported to have a high efficacy when using standardized protocols in Bowen’s disease (BD), superficial basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and in thin nodular BCC. However, long-term recurrence studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of PDT with topical methylaminolevulinate (MAL) for the treatment of BD and BCC in a dermato-oncology department. Materials & Methods: All patients with the diagnosis of BD or BCC, treated with MAL-PDT from the years 2004 to 2008, were enrolled. Treatment protocol included two MAL-PDT sessions one week apart repeated at three months when incomplete response, using a red light dose of 37-40 J/cm2 and an exposure time of 8’20’’. Clinical records were retrospectively reviewed, and data regarding age, sex, tumour location, size, treatment outcomes and recurrence were registered. Descriptive analysis was performed using chi square tests, followed by survival analysis with the Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. Results: Sixty-eight patients (median age 71.0 years, P25;P75=30;92) with a total of 78 tumours (31 BD, 45 superficial BCC, 2 nodular BCC) and a median tumour size of 5 cm2 were treated. Overall, the median follow-up period was 43.5 months (P25;P75=0;100), and a total recurrence rate of 33.8% was observed (24.4 % for BCC vs. 45.2% for BD). Estimated recurrence rates for BCC and BD were 5.0% vs. 7.4% at 6 months, 23.4% vs. 27.9% at 12 months, and 30.0% vs. 72.4% at 60 months. Both age and diagnosis were independent prognostic factors for recurrence, with significantly higher estimated recurrence rates in patients with BD (p=0.0036) or younger than 58 years old (p=0.039). The risk of recurrence (hazard ratio) was 2.4 times higher in patients with BD compared to superficial BCC (95% CI:1.1-5.3; p=0.033), and 2.8 times higher in patients younger than 58 years old (95% CI:1.2-6.5; p=0.02). Conclusions: In the studied population, estimated recurrence rates are higher than those expected from available literature, possibly due to a longer follow-up period. To the authors’ knowledge there is only one other study with a similar follow-up period, regarding BCC solely. BD, as an in situ squamous cell carcinoma, has a higher tendency to recur than superficial BCC. Despite greater cosmesis, PDT might no be the best treatment option for young patients considering their higher risk of recurrence.

Quantitative Analysis of Immunoglobulin E Reactivity Profiles in Patients Allergic or Sensitized to Natural Rubber Latex (Hevea Brasiliensis)

Characterized native and recombinant Hevea brasiliensis (rHev b) natural rubber latex (NRL) allergens are available to assess patient allergen sensitization profiles. OBJECTIVE: Quantification of individual IgE responses to the spectrum of documented NRL allergens and evaluation of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) for more definitive diagnosis. METHODS: Sera of 104 healthcare workers (HCW; 51 German, 21 Portuguese, 32 American), 31 spina bifida patients (SB; 11 German, 20 Portuguese) and 10 Portuguese with multiple surgeries (MS) were analysed for allergen-specific IgE antibody (sIgE) to NRL, single Hev b allergens and CCDs with ImmunoCAP technology. RESULTS: In all patient groups rHev b 5-sIgE concentrations were the most pronounced. Hev b 2, 5, 6.01 and 13 were identified as the major allergens in HCW and combined with Hev b 1 and Hev b 3 in SB. In MS Hev b 1 displayed an intermediate relevance. Different sIgE antibody levels to native Hevea brasiliensis (nHev b) 2 and rHev b 6.01 allowed discrimination of SB with clinical relevant latex allergy vs. those with latex sensitization. Sensitization profiles of German, Portuguese and American patients were equivalent. rHev b 5, 6.01 and nHev b 13 combined detected 100% of the latex-allergic HCW and 80.1% of the SB. Only 8.3% of the sera showed sIgE response to CCDs. CONCLUSIONS: Hev b 1, 2, 5, 6.01 and 13 were identified as the major Hev b allergens and they should be present in standardized latex extracts and in vitro allergosorbents. CCDs are only of minor relevance in patients with clinical relevant latex allergy. Component-resolved diagnostic analyses for latex allergy set the stage for an allergen-directed immunotherapy strategy