Background: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is widely used as a treatment for actinic keratoses (AK), with new sunlight-based regimens proposed as alternatives to lamp-based treatments. Prescribing indoor daylight activation could help address the seasonal temperature, clinical supervision, and access variability associated with outdoor treatments.
Objective: To compare the AK lesion clearance efficacy of indoor daylight PDT treatment (30 min of 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) pre-incubation, followed by 2 h of indoor sunlight) versus a lamp-based PDT treatment (30 min of ALA preincubation, followed by 10 min of red light).
Methods: A prospective clinical trial was conducted with 41 patients. Topical 10% ALA was applied to the entire treatment site (face, forehead, scalp). Patients were assigned to either the lamp-based or indoor daylight treatment. Actinic keratosis lesion counts were determined by clinical examination and recorded for pre-treatment, 1-month, and 6-month follow-up visits.
Results: There was no statistical difference in the efficacy of AK lesion clearance between the red-lamp (1-month clearance = 57 ± 17%, 6-month clearance = 57 ± 20%) and indoor daylight treatment (1-month clearance = 61 ± 19%, 6-month clearance = 67 ± 20%). A 95% confidence interval of the difference of the means was measured between -4.4% and 13.4% for 1-month, and -2.2% and +23.6% for 6-month timepoints when comparing the indoor daylight to the red-lamp treatment, with a priori interval of equivalence of ±20%.
Limitations: Ensuring an equivalent dose between the indoor and lamp treatment cohorts limited randomisation since it required performing indoor daylight treatments only during sunny days.
Conclusion: Indoor-daylight PDT provided equivalent AK treatment efficacy to a lamp-based regimen while overcoming temperature limitations and UV-block sunscreen issues associated with outdoor sunlight treatments in the winter.
Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov listing: NCT03805737.
© 2023 The Authors. Skin Health and Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.