AzTrials
AzTrials

Bowen's DiseaseNCT03012009

Laser Assisted Drug Delivery in the Treatment of Superficial Non Melanoma Skin Cancer: a Randomized Controlled Trial

A study testing full ablative CO2 laser, fractional ablative CO2 laser and MAL in people with Bowen's Disease and Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma, run by University Hospital, Ghent at 1 site in Belgium.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a well established treatment option for superficial non melanoma skin cancer, such as superficial basal cell carcinoma (sBCC) and Bowen Disease (BD). However, a limited uptake of the topically applied photosensitizer methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) may reduce its efficacy. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
full ablative CO2 laser, fractional ablative CO2 laser and MAL
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
16 participants
Where
1 siteBelgium
Study dates
Sep 2014to May 2017
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • non operable superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma or Bowen's Disease lesions
  • and the presence of at least two lesions or the presence of one lesion covering an area greater than 5cm2

Who cannot join

None listed.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Belgium1 site
  • Department of Dermatology, Ghent University Hospital

    Ghent

Other trials in Belgium

About this study

Official title: A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Full and a Fractional Ablative Carbon Dioxide Laser as Pretreatment for Photodynamic Therapy in the Management of Superficial Non Melanoma Skin Cancer

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a well established treatment option for superficial non melanoma skin cancer, such as superficial basal cell carcinoma (sBCC) and Bowen Disease (BD). However, a limited uptake of the topically applied photosensitizer methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) may reduce its efficacy. Pretreatment with an ablative carbon dioxide (CO2) laser has recently been studied in order to enhance the skin penetration of this photosensitizer. This study compares the results of a full ablative and a fractional ablative CO2 laser mode as pretreatment of PDT in the management of sBCC and BD. The endpoints efficacy, pain, aesthetics and patient preference are investigated during twelve months of follow up.

Read the detailed description

Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma (sBCC) and Bowen Disease (BD) are malignant skin tumors localised in the superficial epidermis. These tumors are highly prevalent in the caucasian population. Diagnosis of sBCC and BD is often delayed because the clinical manifestation may be discrete and lesions are sometimes wrongly diagnosed and treated as eczema. Once the diagnosis is established, the lesions may cover an extensive area, making surgical excision more difficult. At that moment, the physician can make use of less invasive techniques such as photodynamic therapy (PDT). Pretreatment with an ablative carbon dioxide (CO2) laser has recently been studied in order to enhance the skin penetration of the photosensitizer methyl aminolevulinate (MAL). This study compares the results of a full ablative and a fractional ablative CO2 laser mode as pretreatment of PDT in the management of sBCC and BD. Ablation of the upper epiderm of the cancer results in an deeper penetration of MAL. Fractional ablation is known to result in better wound healing compared to full ablative CO2 laser ablation, because only small skin columns are ablated instead of the entire epidermal layer. Patients with non operable sBCC or BD lesions covering an area of at least 5 cm2 or with the presence of two small separated lesions, will be investigated. Lesions greater than 5 cm2 are divided in two. After randomization, the half of the lesions will be pretreated with the full ablative CO2 laser, while the other half with the fractional ablative CO2 laser. Afterwards, the entire surface is treated with MAL-PDT. Such as in our current clinical practice, this treatment modality is repeated after a two week interval. Thus, every subject undergoes both treatment modalities, making within-patient comparison possible. The endpoints efficacy, pain, aesthetics and patient preference are investigated during twelve months of follow up.

Being tested
full ablative CO2 laser, fractional ablative CO2 laser, MAL, LED lamp, lidocaine hydrochloride 2% with epinephrine
Keywords
Bowen's Disease, Superficial Basal Cel Carcinoma, Non melanoma skin cancer, Photodynamic therapy, PDT, CO2 laser, Laser assisted drug delivery, Carbon dioxide laser, Laser assisted photodynamic therapy
Medical subject headings
Bowen's Disease

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • full ablative CO2 laserDevice

    Also called full ablative carbon dioxide laser

    ablation to the level of de dermal papilla

  • fractional ablative CO2 laserDevice

    Also called fractional ablative carbon dioxide laser

    180 micron HP, pulse 8ms, 15% overlay, 30 W (943J/cm)

  • MALDrug

    Also called methyl aminolevulinate, Metvix® (Galderma)

  • LED lampDevice

    Also called Aktilite® (Galderma), light-emitting diodes

    peak wavelength 630 nm, 37J/cm2

  • lidocaine hydrochloride 2% with epinephrineDrug

    Also called local anaesthetic, xylocaine® 2% with epinephrine

Study groups in NCT03012009
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Full ablative CO2 laser + MAL PDTActive comparatorThe treatment starts with a full ablative CO2 laser pretreatment under local anaesthesia with injectable lidocaine hydrochloride 2% with epinephrine. This ablation is followed by photodynamic therapy: MAL is topically applied, followed by a 3 hours incubation under occlusion, whereafter 10 minutes of illumination with a LED lamp. This treatment is repeated after 14 days.
Receives: Device: full ablative CO2 laser; Drug: MAL; Device: LED lamp; Drug: lidocaine hydrochloride 2% with epinephrine
Fractional ablative CO2 laser+ MAL PDTActive comparatorThe treatment starts with a fractional ablative CO2 laser ablation under local anaesthesia with injectable lidocaine hydrochloride 2% with epinephrine. This ablation is followed by photodynamic therapy: MAL is topically applied, followed by a 3 hours incubation under occlusion, whereafter 10 minutes of illumination with LED lamp. This treatment is repeated after 14 days.
Receives: Device: fractional ablative CO2 laser; Drug: MAL; Device: LED lamp; Drug: lidocaine hydrochloride 2% with epinephrine

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Clinical efficacy after twelve months of follow up

    A three point scale with complete regression (CR), partial regression (PR) and no regression (NR) defined respectively as 100%, 25-99% and 0-25% regression.

    Measured: month 12

Secondary outcomes (20)
  1. Clinical efficacy after six months of follow up

    A three point scale with complete regression (CR), partial regression (PR) and no regression (NR) defined respectively as 100%, 25-99% and 0-25% regression.

    Measured: month 6

  2. Clinical efficacy after three months of follow up

    A three point scale with complete regression (CR), partial regression (PR) and no regression (NR) defined respectively as 100%, 25-99% and 0-25% regression.

    Measured: month 3

  3. Histological efficacy after twelve months of follow up

    Measured: month 12

  4. Pain during the first treatment session

    The experienced pain during the treatment is scored bye the patient using a VAS scale of 100 mm.

    Measured: immediately after the first treatment session (day 1)

  5. Pain during the second treatment session

    The experienced pain during the treatment is scored by the patient using a VAS scale of 100 mm.

    Measured: immediately after the second treatment session (day 14)

  6. Side effects after the first treatment session

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the investigator: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: immediately after the first treatment session (day 1)

  7. Side effects after one week of follow up, telephone survey

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the patient: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: day 7

  8. Side effects before the second treatment session

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the investigator: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: before initiation of the second treatment session (day 14)

  9. Side effects after the second treatment

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the investigator: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: immediately after the second treatment session (day 14)

  10. Side effects after two weeks of follow up, telephone survey

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the patient: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: day 21

  11. Side effects after three months follow up

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the investigator: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: month 3

  12. Side effects after six months of follow up

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the investigator: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: month 6

  13. Side effects after twelve months of follow up

    The presence of following side effects is evaluated by the investigator: erythema, vesicles, pigment changes, scarring, infection and pain.

    Measured: month 12

  14. Aesthetic result after three months of follow up

    The aesthetic result is scored by a blinded investigator using a four point scale: excellent (no significant changes), good (minor changes), poor (serious dyspigmentation, visible scarring), very poor (important scarring).

    Measured: month 3

  15. Aesthetic result after six months of follow up

    The aesthetic result is scored a by blinded investigator using a four point scale: excellent (no significant changes), good (minor changes), poor (serious dyspigmentation, visible scarring), very poor (important scarring).

    Measured: month 6

  16. Aesthetic result after twelve months of follow up

    The aesthetic result is scored a by blinded investigator using a four point scale: excellent (no significant changes), good (minor changes), poor (serious dyspigmentation, visible scarring), very poor (important scarring).

    Measured: month 12

  17. Aesthetic result according to the patient after three months of follow up

    The aesthetic result is scored by the patient using a four point scale: excellent (no significant changes), good (minor changes), poor (serious dyspigmentation, visible scarring), very poor (important scarring).

    Measured: month 3

  18. Aesthetic result according to the patient after six months of follow up

    The aesthetic result is scored by the patient using a four point scale: excellent (no significant changes), good (minor changes), poor (serious dyspigmentation, visible scarring), very poor (important scarring).

    Measured: month 6

  19. Aesthetic result according to the patient after twelve months of follow up

    The aesthetic result is scored by the patient using a four point scale: excellent (no significant changes), good (minor changes), poor (serious dyspigmentation, visible scarring), very poor (important scarring).

    Measured: month 12

  20. Technique of preference according to the patient

    Patients are asked for their preferred therapy. Following options exist: (1) full ablative CO2 laser + PDT, (2) fractional ablative CO2 laser + PDT, (3) no preference

    Measured: month 12

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted6 Jan 2017 (estimated)
  2. Study startSep 2014
  3. Primary completionMay 2017
  4. Study completionMay 2017

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
16 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03012009
Sponsor's protocol ID
EC/2014/0735
Status last verified
Jan 2018
First submitted
21 Nov 2016
Last updated
25 Jan 2018
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing full ablative CO2 laser, fractional ablative CO2 laser and MAL in people with Bowen's Disease and Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma, run by University Hospital, Ghent at 1 site in Belgium.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jan 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Clinical efficacy after twelve months of follow up (time frame: month 12). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Jan 2018.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in