Cargando…

Repeated Treatments with Ingenol Mebutate Prevents Progression of UV-Induced Photodamage in Hairless Mice

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Ingenol mebutate (IngMeb) is an effective treatment for actinic keratosis. In this study, we hypothesized that repeated treatments with IngMeb may prevent progression of UV-induced photodamage, and that concurrent application of a corticosteroid may reduce IngMeb-induced local sk...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Erlendsson, Andrés Már, Thaysen-Petersen, Daniel, Bay, Christiane, Hald, Andreas, Skak, Kresten, Zibert, John Robert, Paasch, Uwe, Wulf, Hans Christian, Haedersdal, Merete
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5026374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27636884
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162597
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND AIM: Ingenol mebutate (IngMeb) is an effective treatment for actinic keratosis. In this study, we hypothesized that repeated treatments with IngMeb may prevent progression of UV-induced photodamage, and that concurrent application of a corticosteroid may reduce IngMeb-induced local skin responses (LSR). METHODS: Hairless mice (n = 60; 3 groups of 20 mice) were irradiated with solar simulated ultraviolet radiation (UVR) throughout the study. Five single treatments with IngMeb were given at 4-week intervals (Days 21, 49, 77, 105, and 133). Clobetasol propionate (CP) was applied once daily for 5 days prior to each IngMeb application, as well as 6 h and 1 day post treatment. One week after IngMeb treatment No. 1, 3, and 5 (Days 28, 84, and 140), biopsies from four mice in each group were collected for histological evaluation of UV-damage on a standardized UV-damage scale (0–12). LSR (0–24) were assessed once daily (Days 1–7) after each IngMeb treatment. RESULTS: IngMeb prevented progression of photodamage in terms of keratosis grade, epidermal hypertrophy, dysplasia, and dermal actinic damage with a lower composite UV-damage score on day 140 (UVR 10.25 vs. UVR+IngMeb 6.00, p = 0.002) compared to UVR alone. IngMeb induced LSR, including erythema, flaking, crusting, bleeding, vesiculation, and ulceration. Concurrent CP increased LSR (max LSR Tx 1–5: UVR+IngMeb+CP 3.6–5.5 vs. UVR+IngMeb 2.6–4.3) and provided better prevention of photodamage compared to IngMeb alone (Day 140: UVR+IngMeb 6.00 vs. UVR+IngMeb+CP 3.00 p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Repeated field-directed treatments with IngMeb prevent progression of cutaneous photodamage in hairless mice, while CP cannot be used to alleviate IngMeb-induced LSR. The findings suggest that IngMeb may potentially serve as a prophylactic treatment for UV-induced tumors.