AFXL-PDT is more effective than conventional PDT for treatment of AK in field-cancerized skin.

Long-term efficacy was similar after PDT and AFXL-PDT with a trend for a favourable short-term cure rate after AFXL-PDT. AFXL-PDT needs further refinement for nBCC and at present is not recommended over PDT.

Objectives:The MONARCA I and II trials were negative but suggested that smartphone-based monitoring may increase quality of life and reduce perceived stress in bipolar disorder (BD). The present trial was the first to investigate the effect of smartphone-based monitoring on the rate and duration of readmissions in BD. Methods: This was a randomized controlled single-blind parallel-group trial. Patients with BD (ICD-10) discharged from hospitalization in the Mental Health Services, Capital Region of Denmark were randomized 1:1 to daily smartphone-based monitoring including a feedback loop (+ standard treatment) or to standard treatment for 6 months. Primary outcomes: the rate and duration of psychiatric readmissions. Results: We included 98 patients with BD. In ITT analyses, there was no statistically significant difference in rates (hazard rate: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.54; 1.91, p = 0.88) or duration of readmission between the two groups (B: 3.67, 95% CI: −4.77; 12.11, p = 0.39). There was no difference in scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (B = −0.11, 95% CI: −2.50; 2.29, p = 0.93). The intervention group had higher scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (B: 1.89, 95% CI: 0.0078; 3.78, p = 0.050).The intervention group reported lower levels of perceived stress (B: -7.18, 95% CI: −13.50; −0.86, p = 0.026) and lower levels of rumination (B: −6.09, 95% CI: −11.19; −1.00, p = 0.019). Conclusions: Smartphone-based monitoring did not reduce rate and duration of readmissions. There was no difference in levels of depressive symptoms. The intervention group had higher levels of manic symptoms, but lower perceived stress and rumination compared with the control group.

No abstract

Skin pigmentation and IPL fluence are major determinants of side effects after IPL exposure, while a single exposure to three SED of UVR at 30 minutes or 24 hours after IPL, does not amplify such side effects. Lasers Surg. Med. 49:88-96, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Available evidence from prospective, uncontrolled clinical trials indicates short-term hair removal efficacy of currently available home-use light-based hair removal devices. Additional controlled trials will be helpful to substantiate the efficacy and to better predict the incidence of adverse events associated with optical home-use hair removal.

The time frame to maintain enhanced drug delivery sustained for several hours after AFXL exposure, corresponding to channel morphology and loss of skin integrity. Lasers Surg. Med. 49:348-354, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

No abstract