Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective And Study Design: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an emerging treatment modality for various diseases, especially for dermatological conditions. Although, the standard PDT protocol for the treatment of actinic keratoses in Europe has shown to be effective, treatment-associated pain is often observed in patients. Different modifications to this protocol attempted to decrease pain have been investigated. The decrease in fluence rate seems to be a promising solution. Moreover, it has been suggested that light fractionation significantly increases the efficacy of PDT. Based on a flexible light-emitting textile, the FLEXITHERALIGHT device specifically provides a fractionated illumination at a fluence rate more than six times lower than that of the standard protocol. In a recently completed clinical trial of PDT for the treatment of actinic keratosis, the non-inferiority of a protocol involving illumination with the FLEXITHERALIGHT device after a short incubation time and referred to as the FLEXITHERALIGHT protocol has been assessed compared to the standard protocol. In this paper, we propose a comparison of the two above mentioned 635 nm red light protocols with 37 J/cm in the PDT treatment of actinic keratosis: the standard protocol and the FLEXITHERALIGHT one through a mathematical modeling.
Methods: This mathematical modeling, which slightly differs from the one we have already published, enables the local damage induced by the therapy to be estimated.
Results: The comparison performed in terms of the local damage induced by the therapy demonstrates that the FLEXITHERALIGHT protocol with lower fluence rate, light fractionation and shorter incubation time is somewhat less efficient than the standard protocol. Nevertheless, from the clinical trial results, the FLEXITHERALIGHT protocol results in non-inferior response rates compared to the standard protocol.
Conclusion: This finding raises the question of whether the PDT local damage achieved by the FLEXITHERALIGHT protocol (respectively, the standard protocol) is sufficient (respectively, excessive) to destroy actinic keratosis cells. Lasers Surg. Med. 49:686-697, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lsm.22665 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!