Cargando…

Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study

BACKGROUND: Actinic keratosis (AK) is characterized by preinvasive, cancerous lesions on sun-exposed skin that negatively affect patient quality of life and may progress to invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). If untreated, AK may either regress or progress to SCC, with significant morbidity and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lecomte, Fabienne, Vignion-Dewalle, Anne Sophie, Vicentini, Claire, Thecua, Elise, Deleporte, Pascal, Duhamel, Alain, Mordon, Serge, Mortier, Laurent
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6658309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31025952
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/11530
_version_ 1783438944867713024
author Lecomte, Fabienne
Vignion-Dewalle, Anne Sophie
Vicentini, Claire
Thecua, Elise
Deleporte, Pascal
Duhamel, Alain
Mordon, Serge
Mortier, Laurent
author_facet Lecomte, Fabienne
Vignion-Dewalle, Anne Sophie
Vicentini, Claire
Thecua, Elise
Deleporte, Pascal
Duhamel, Alain
Mordon, Serge
Mortier, Laurent
author_sort Lecomte, Fabienne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Actinic keratosis (AK) is characterized by preinvasive, cancerous lesions on sun-exposed skin that negatively affect patient quality of life and may progress to invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). If untreated, AK may either regress or progress to SCC, with significant morbidity and possible lethal outcomes. The most commonly used treatments for AK are cryotherapy, topical chemotherapy and, more recently, photodynamic therapy (PDT). This clinical study is part of a project that aims to create specific light-emitting fabrics (LEFs) that strongly improve the efficiency and reliability of PDT as a treatment for AK. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a new PDT protocol involving the Flexitheralight device (N-PDT) with the classical protocol involving the Aktilite CL 128 device (C-PDT; Galderma Laboratories) for the treatment of AK. All participants receive both protocols. The primary objective of this study is to compare the lesion response rate after 3 months of N-PDT with C-PDT. Secondary objectives are evaluations of pain and local tolerance during treatment, clinical evolution of the subject's skin, and evaluations of patient quality of life and satisfaction. METHODS: The study is a split-face, intraindividual comparison of two PDT protocols. The total number of patients recruited was 42. Patients were exposed to a continuous red light with the Aktilite CL 128 device on one side of the face and to fractionated red illumination with the new device, Flexitheralight, on the other side of the face. Males or females over the age of 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of at least 10 previously untreated, nonpigmented, nonhyperkeratotic grade I and II AK lesions of the forehead and/or scalp were included and were recruited from the Department of Dermatology of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille. The patients came to the investigational center for one treatment session (day 1), and they were followed up after 7 days, 3 months and 6 months. A second treatment session was performed on day 111 in cases in which an incomplete response was observed at the 3-month follow-up. Data will be analyzed using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc). Continuous variables will be reported as means and standard deviations, and categorical variables will be reported as frequencies and percentages. The Shapiro-Wilk test will be used to assess the normality of the distribution. RESULTS: The clinical investigation was performed by July 2018. Data analysis was performed at the end of 2018, and results are expected to be published in early 2019. CONCLUSIONS: This phase II clinical trial aims to evaluate the noninferior efficacy and superior tolerability of N-PDT compared to that of C-PDT. If N-PDT is both efficacious and tolerable, N-PDT could become the treatment of choice for AK due to its ease of implementation in hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03076918; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03076918 (archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/771KA0SSK) INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11530
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6658309
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66583092019-08-08 Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study Lecomte, Fabienne Vignion-Dewalle, Anne Sophie Vicentini, Claire Thecua, Elise Deleporte, Pascal Duhamel, Alain Mordon, Serge Mortier, Laurent JMIR Res Protoc Protocol BACKGROUND: Actinic keratosis (AK) is characterized by preinvasive, cancerous lesions on sun-exposed skin that negatively affect patient quality of life and may progress to invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). If untreated, AK may either regress or progress to SCC, with significant morbidity and possible lethal outcomes. The most commonly used treatments for AK are cryotherapy, topical chemotherapy and, more recently, photodynamic therapy (PDT). This clinical study is part of a project that aims to create specific light-emitting fabrics (LEFs) that strongly improve the efficiency and reliability of PDT as a treatment for AK. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a new PDT protocol involving the Flexitheralight device (N-PDT) with the classical protocol involving the Aktilite CL 128 device (C-PDT; Galderma Laboratories) for the treatment of AK. All participants receive both protocols. The primary objective of this study is to compare the lesion response rate after 3 months of N-PDT with C-PDT. Secondary objectives are evaluations of pain and local tolerance during treatment, clinical evolution of the subject's skin, and evaluations of patient quality of life and satisfaction. METHODS: The study is a split-face, intraindividual comparison of two PDT protocols. The total number of patients recruited was 42. Patients were exposed to a continuous red light with the Aktilite CL 128 device on one side of the face and to fractionated red illumination with the new device, Flexitheralight, on the other side of the face. Males or females over the age of 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of at least 10 previously untreated, nonpigmented, nonhyperkeratotic grade I and II AK lesions of the forehead and/or scalp were included and were recruited from the Department of Dermatology of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille. The patients came to the investigational center for one treatment session (day 1), and they were followed up after 7 days, 3 months and 6 months. A second treatment session was performed on day 111 in cases in which an incomplete response was observed at the 3-month follow-up. Data will be analyzed using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc). Continuous variables will be reported as means and standard deviations, and categorical variables will be reported as frequencies and percentages. The Shapiro-Wilk test will be used to assess the normality of the distribution. RESULTS: The clinical investigation was performed by July 2018. Data analysis was performed at the end of 2018, and results are expected to be published in early 2019. CONCLUSIONS: This phase II clinical trial aims to evaluate the noninferior efficacy and superior tolerability of N-PDT compared to that of C-PDT. If N-PDT is both efficacious and tolerable, N-PDT could become the treatment of choice for AK due to its ease of implementation in hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03076918; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03076918 (archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/771KA0SSK) INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11530 JMIR Publications 2019-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6658309/ /pubmed/31025952 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/11530 Text en ©Fabienne Lecomte, Anne Sophie Vignion-Dewalle, Claire Vicentini, Elise Thecua, Pascal Deleporte, Alain Duhamel, Serge Mordon, Laurent Mortier. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 26.04.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Protocol
Lecomte, Fabienne
Vignion-Dewalle, Anne Sophie
Vicentini, Claire
Thecua, Elise
Deleporte, Pascal
Duhamel, Alain
Mordon, Serge
Mortier, Laurent
Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study
title Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study
title_full Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study
title_fullStr Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study
title_short Evaluating the Noninferiority of a New Photodynamic Therapy (Flexitheralight) Compared With Conventional Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Protocol for a Phase 2 Study
title_sort evaluating the noninferiority of a new photodynamic therapy (flexitheralight) compared with conventional treatment for actinic keratosis: protocol for a phase 2 study
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6658309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31025952
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/11530
work_keys_str_mv AT lecomtefabienne evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT vigniondewalleannesophie evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT vicentiniclaire evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT thecuaelise evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT deleportepascal evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT duhamelalain evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT mordonserge evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study
AT mortierlaurent evaluatingthenoninferiorityofanewphotodynamictherapyflexitheralightcomparedwithconventionaltreatmentforactinickeratosisprotocolforaphase2study