Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 1:06 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-07 @ 10:11 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT01459393
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2017-06-28
First Post:
2011-10-12
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Comparison Between 5-aminolevulinic Acid Photodynamic Therapy Versus Cryotherapy for Actinic Keratosis Treatment
Sponsor:
Barretos Cancer Hospital
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Evaluation of the Formulation of 5-aminolevulinic Acid With Dimethylsulfoxide in Photodynamic Therapy for Treatment of Actinic Keratosis
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2014-02
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
This study aims to compare in a prospective and randomized way actinic keratosis treatment with 5-aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy versus cryotherapy, from the standpoint of therapeutic efficacy, pain, and cosmetic results.
Detailed Description:
Actinic keratosis is a skin lesion induced by chronic sun exposure with a significant prevalence and malignant potential for squamous cell carcinoma, which makes essential its treatment. Today there are several possible therapies, where cryotherapy is usually applied in our practice. Photodynamic therapy (PDT)is another method also widespread for keratosis which involves the administration of a topical precursor drug which produces endogenous photosensitising substances activated by specific light, selectively destroying the diseased tissue. This study aims to evaluate the use the drug formulation for photodynamic therapy 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) associated with dimethyl sulfoxide, comparing its efficacy with conventional cryotherapy, and also pain and cosmetic results. This project enrolled 137 outpatients from the Department of Cutaneous Oncology of Barretos Cancer Hospital - Pio XII Foundation, with symmetrical and comparable keratosis in their upper limbs. With the same patient as controls, side arm and therapy to be used were randomized: cryotherapy or photodynamic therapy. For cryotherapy was utilized bottles of liquid nitrogen (Cry-ac, 500ml); and for photodynamic therapy was utilized incoherent red light lamp with a total dosis of 37J/cm² . There was one or two sessions of each therapy , at 0 and 3 months; and three assessments for evaluation were done at 0, 3 and 6 months of onset. The evaluations on efficacy were in terms of area regression, and classified as complete response or no response. Pain was assessed by visual analogue scale, and numerical scale. Cosmesis was evaluated with the presence or not, objectively, of hyper, hypopigmentation or scar retraction. Finally, patient's preference regarding utilized therapeutics was noted by the researcher.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: