BF-200 ALA showed a trend towards improved efficacy results compared with MAL. Thicker lesions in both groups responded when treated repeatedly. Importantly, a thin 0·25-mm layer of the photosensitizer precursors was sufficient, which may lead to lower expense.

The hyperspectral imaging system offers a new, non-invasive method for early detection of field cancerization. Lasers Surg. Med. 45:410-417, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Lentigo maligna (LM) is an in situ form of melanoma which can progress into invasive lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM). Variations in the pigmentation and thus visibility of the tumour make assessment of lesion borders challenging. We tested hyperspectral imaging system (HIS) in in vivo preoperative delineation of LM and LMM margins. We compared lesion margins delineated by HIS with those estimated clinically, and confirmed histologically. A total of 14 LMs and 5 LMMs in 19 patients were included. HIS analysis matched the histo-pathological analysis in 18/19 (94.7%) cases while in 1/19 (5.3%) cases HIS showed lesion extension not confirmed by histopathology (false positives). Compared to clinical examination, HIS defined lesion borders more accurately in 10/19 (52.6%) of cases (wider, n = 7 or smaller, n = 3) while in 8/19 (42.1%) cases lesion borders were the same as delineated clinically as confirmed histologically. Thus, HIS is useful for the detection of subclinical LM/LMM borders.

Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) is considered as effective as conventional PDT using artificial light (light-emitting diode (LED)-PDT) for treatment of actinic keratoses (AK). This randomized prospective non-sponsored study assessed the cost-effectiveness of DL-PDT compared with LED-PDT. Seventy patients with 210 AKs were randomized to DL-PDT or LED-PDT groups. Effectiveness was assessed at 6 months. The costs included societal costs and private costs, including the time patients spent in treatment. Results are presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The total costs per patient were significantly lower for DL-PDT (€132) compared with LED-PDT (€170), giving a cost saving of €38 (p = 0.022). The estimated probabilities for patients' complete response were 0.429 for DL-PDT and 0.686 for LED-PDT; a difference in probability of being healed of 0.257. ICER showed a monetary gain of €147 per unit of effectiveness lost. DL-PDT is less costly and less effective than LED-PDT. In terms of cost-effectiveness analysis, DL-PDT provides lower value for money compared with LED-PDT.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract