CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03322293Updated Mar 9, 2022Results posted

Daylight Photodynamic Therapy for Actinic Keratosis

A Phase 1 interventional study of Aminolevulinic Acid Topical 20% Topical Solution and BLU-U blue light phototherapy illuminator in Actinic Keratoses, sponsored by University of California, San Francisco. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-03-09.

Sponsored by University of California, San Francisco · Phase 1, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 1
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
24
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is a randomized, single-blind controlled trial with parallel group design to determine whether daylight photodynamic therapy (PDT) affords a reduction in treatment symptoms of pain, burning, and pruritus as measured by 1) symptom level during the treatment period and 2) pain at the end of treatment exposure.

Read the detailed description

Actinic keratoses (AK) are common precancerous skin lesions that arise on sun-damaged skin. Treatment is aimed at preventing progression to cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). First-line therapy for clinically apparent lesions includes cryotherapy and curettage; and field therapy options are topical 5-fluorouracil, imiquimod, ingenol mebutate, and photodynamic therapy (PDT). PDT involves the topical application of aminolevulinic acid (ALA), or one of its derivatives, as a photosensitizing agent. In response, rapidly proliferating, dysplastic cells preferentially accumulate protoporphyrin IX (PpIX). When PpIX is activated by blue or red light, singlet oxygen species are produced, resulting in cell death. PDT is beneficial due to its brief treatment course and efficacy in clearing AK. However, its main drawbacks are the adverse effects of pain, burning, pruritus, erythema, crusting, and inflammation associated with treatment. While conventional PDT uses red or blue artificial light to activate a high concentration of accumulated protoporphyrins, daylight PDT uses natural daylight to activate lower levels of protoporphyrins in a continuous manner. Daylight PDT, when compared with conventional PDT, has been associated with significantly less pain while achieving comparable efficacy for the treatment of AK. Daylight PDT is also more cost-effective and reduces the amount of time spent in clinic. Previous randomized studies comparing daylight PDT with conventional PDT have largely used methyl-aminolevulinate as the photosensitizer, have been intra-individual comparative studies, and have been performed in Nordic countries. Because the effective light dose from natural daylight depends on geographic location and seasonal and weather changes, randomized trials in different geographic and environmental conditions are of interest. The proposed randomized clinical trial investigates the tolerability and efficacy of daylight ALA-PDT for the treatment of AK in San Francisco for the first time; subjects will be randomized to various treatment arms, as opposed to previous split-face and intra-individual studies.

02

Conditions studied

  • Actinic Keratoses

Keywords

  • Actinic Keratoses
  • photodynamic therapy
  • aminolevulinic acid
  • precancerous skin lesion
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults at least 18 years old.
  • Subjects must be able to read, sign, and understand the informed consent
  • Subjects have at least 4 and no more than 20 clinically typical, visible actinic keratoses in the target treatment area on the face or scalp.
  • Subject must be willing to forego any other treatments for AK in the treatment area on the face or scalp, during the study period, and for 14 days prior to screening; including cryotherapy, topical 5-fluorouracil, imiquimod, and ingenol mebutate.
  • Subjects who have previously received PDT must undergo at least an 8-week washout period prior to enrollment in study.
  • Subject must be willing and able to participate in the study and to comply with all study requirements including concomitant medication and other treatment restrictions, and telephone interview.
  • If subject is a female of childbearing potential she must have a negative urine pregnancy test result prior to study treatment initiation and must agree to use an approved method of birth control while enrolled in the study. Women who are pregnant, lactating, or planning to become pregnant during the study period are excluded from the study.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Subjects with any dermatologic disease in the treatment area that may be exacerbated by the treatment proposed or that might impair the evaluation of AKs.
  • Subjects who are currently participating in another clinical study or have completed another clinical study with an investigational drug or device on the study area within 30 days prior to study treatment initiation.
  • Subjects with any medical condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, makes the patient unsuitable for the trial.
04

Study design

Phase
Phase 1
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Investigator)
Enrollment
24 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    A. Conventional arm

    This is considered the standard of care arm for photodynamic therapy for the treatment of actinic keratosis. This treatment arm includes: Acetone preparation, ALA topical application, 1 hour incubation, 16 minutes 40 seconds (16:40) BLU-U exposure, application of sunscreen. Drug intervention: Aminolevulinic acid HCl (ALA) topical solution 20% Device: BLU-U blue light phototherapy illuminator

    Drug: Aminolevulinic Acid Topical 20% Topical Solution · Device: BLU-U blue light phototherapy illuminator

  • Experimental
    B. Combination arm

    This treatment arm combines standard of care BLU-U exposure and daylight exposure. This treatment arm includes: Acetone preparation, ALA topical application, 15 minute incubation, 16:40 BLU-U exposure, application of sunscreen, 45 minute daylight exposure. Drug intervention: Aminolevulinic acid HCl (ALA) topical solution 20% Device: BLU-U blue light phototherapy illuminator

    Drug: Aminolevulinic Acid Topical 20% Topical Solution · Device: BLU-U blue light phototherapy illuminator

  • Experimental
    C. Daylight arm

    This is the experimental arm. This treatment arm includes: Acetone preparation, ALA topical application, 15 minute incubation, application of sunscreen, 1 hour daylight exposure. Drug intervention: Aminolevulinic acid HCl (ALA) topical solution 20% Device: none

    Drug: Aminolevulinic Acid Topical 20% Topical Solution

Interventions

  • DrugAminolevulinic Acid Topical 20% Topical Solution

    PDT involves the topical application of aminolevulinic acid (ALA), or one of its derivatives, as a photosensitizing agent. Subjects will receive ALA in all treatment arms (A, B, and C).

  • DeviceBLU-U blue light phototherapy illuminator

    Depending on the treatment arm, subjects will either receive BLU-U exposure or not. Treatment arms A and B have BLU-U exposure and treatment arm C does not.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Treatment Symptoms

    Primary objective is to determine whether daylight PDT changes treatment symptoms of pain, stinging/burning, and itching/pruritus. This was measured using a visual analog scale from 0-10, with higher scores indicating worse treatment symptoms, or more pain/burning/itching. Lower scores indicate less pain, burning/stinging, and itching/pruritus. Positive numbers represent increases in symptoms and negative numbers represent decreases.

    Time frame: 12 weeks

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percent Change in AK Lesion Count

    The number of actinic keratoses within the treatment area was counted both pre and post-treatment. Then, the mean percent change from baseline actinic keratosis lesion count was calculated for each treatment group.

    Time frame: 12 weeks

  2. Reduction of AK Counts

    The number of AK lesions within the treatment area was assessed both pre and post-treatment. Then, the number of participants with various levels of AK lesion reduction (100% reduction or greater than 75% reduction) was calculated for each treatment group. This outcome measures the proportion of subjects with complete (100%) and partial (greater than or equal to 75%) reduction of baseline actinic keratosis lesion counts at 12 weeks (study end).

    Time frame: 12 weeks

  3. Change in Local Skin Reaction From Pre-treatment to 12 Weeks Post-treatment

    To determine whether daylight PDT affords a reduction in local skin reaction to treatment. A Local Skin Response Assessment scale will be used to measure this outcome. The investigators will grade categories including Erythema, Flaking/Scaling, crusting, swelling, Pustulation (pustules), and Erosion, on a 0-4 scale (total maximum score of 24). A higher score indicates more erythema, flaking, crusting, etc. and therefore a more robust skin reaction. A score of 0 represents no erythema, flaking, crusting, etc.

    Time frame: 12 weeks

  4. Peak Pain Score at Day 8 Post-treatment

    Pain was measured by patient report with a visual analog scale from 0-10. 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates the maximum pain score.

    Time frame: 8 days post-treatment

06

Results

Posted Oct 4, 2019
Limitations and caveats
This was a small, 24 person pilot study performed at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center. As such, the study was not powered to detect statistically significant differences in treatment efficacies.

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Started888
Completed887
Not completed001
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up001

Outcome measures

PrimaryChange in Treatment Symptoms

Primary objective is to determine whether daylight PDT changes treatment symptoms of pain, stinging/burning, and itching/pruritus. This was measured using a visual analog scale from 0-10, with higher scores indicating worse treatment symptoms, or more pain/burning/itching. Lower scores indicate less pain, burning/stinging, and itching/pruritus. Positive numbers represent increases in symptoms and negative numbers represent decreases.

Time frame:
12 weeks
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Change in Treatment Symptoms
score on a scaleA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Change in Treatment Symptoms3.9 (3.11 to 4.63)0.5 (-0.26 to 1.26)0.37 (-0.38 to 1.13)
SecondaryPercent Change in AK Lesion Count

The number of actinic keratoses within the treatment area was counted both pre and post-treatment. Then, the mean percent change from baseline actinic keratosis lesion count was calculated for each treatment group.

Time frame:
12 weeks
Reported as:
Mean · percent change
Percent Change in AK Lesion Count
percent changeA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Percent Change in AK Lesion Count63.9 ± 24.966.4 ± 29.561.8 ± 59.9
SecondaryReduction of AK Counts

The number of AK lesions within the treatment area was assessed both pre and post-treatment. Then, the number of participants with various levels of AK lesion reduction (100% reduction or greater than 75% reduction) was calculated for each treatment group. This outcome measures the proportion of subjects with complete (100%) and partial (greater than or equal to 75%) reduction of baseline actinic keratosis lesion counts at 12 weeks (study end).

Time frame:
12 weeks
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Reduction of AK Counts
ParticipantsA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Partial Clearance235
Complete Clearance222
SecondaryChange in Local Skin Reaction From Pre-treatment to 12 Weeks Post-treatment

To determine whether daylight PDT affords a reduction in local skin reaction to treatment. A Local Skin Response Assessment scale will be used to measure this outcome. The investigators will grade categories including Erythema, Flaking/Scaling, crusting, swelling, Pustulation (pustules), and Erosion, on a 0-4 scale (total maximum score of 24). A higher score indicates more erythema, flaking, crusting, etc. and therefore a more robust skin reaction. A score of 0 represents no erythema, flaking, crusting, etc.

Time frame:
12 weeks
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Change in Local Skin Reaction From Pre-treatment to 12 Weeks Post-treatment
score on a scaleA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Change in Local Skin Reaction From Pre-treatment to 12 Weeks Post-treatment1.0 (0.12 to 1.88)1.25 (0.37 to 2.13)1.0 (0.07 to 1.93)
SecondaryPeak Pain Score at Day 8 Post-treatment

Pain was measured by patient report with a visual analog scale from 0-10. 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates the maximum pain score.

Time frame:
8 days post-treatment
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Peak Pain Score at Day 8 Post-treatment
score on a scaleA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Peak Pain Score at Day 8 Post-treatment3.5 (2.62 to 4.38)5.13 (4.25 to 6.00)4.00 (3.07 to 4.93)

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse event data were collected from enrollment of first participant in Decomber 2017 through completion of final participant in September 2018. Adverse events were monitored for each patient from treatment up until 84 days following treatment.. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
A. Conventional Arm0/8 (0%)0/8 (0%)8/8 (100%)
B. Combination Arm0/8 (0%)0/8 (0%)8/8 (100%)
C. Daylight Arm0/8 (0%)0/8 (0%)8/8 (100%)
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventA. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight Arm
Pruritus in Treatment AreaSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders2/85/83/8
Burning/Pain in Treatment AreaSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders5/81/83/8
ScalingSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders3/80/83/8
Erythema in Treatment AreaSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders2/82/82/8

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
<=18 years0000
Between 18 and 65 years1113
>=65 years77721
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
Mean71.9 (64.4 to 85.1)77.7 (64.5 to 89.6)75.0 (60.7 to 93.9)75 (60 to 94)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
Female0000
Male88824
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
Hispanic or Latino0101
Not Hispanic or Latino87823
Unknown or Not Reported0000
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native0000
Asian0000
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander0000
Black or African American0000
White88824
More than one race0000
Unknown or Not Reported0000
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
United States88824
Treatment Area
Treatment Area(Participants)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
Face56617
Scalp3227
Actinic Keratosis Count
Actinic Keratosis Count(lesion count)A. Conventional ArmB. Combination ArmC. Daylight ArmTotal
Mean12.1 ± 4.211.3 ± 3.010.3 ± 3.710.8 ± 4.9
07

Study locations

1 site
  • UCSF Dermatology
    San Francisco, California 94115, United States
08

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Mar 13, 2017

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03322293
Lead sponsor
University of California, San Francisco
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 26, 2017
Start date
Dec 1, 2017
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2018
Completion
Jul 1, 2019
Results posted
Oct 4, 2019
Last update
Mar 9, 2022

Study contacts

Sarah Arron, MD
principal investigator · University of California, San Francisco

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion