Hemoporfin Photodynamic Therapy for Port-Wine Stain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has shown potentially beneficial results in treating port-wine stain, but its benefit-risk profile remains undefined. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PDT conducted with hemoporfin and a 532 nm continuous wave laser to treat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yi Zhao, Ping Tu, Guoyu Zhou, Zhanchao Zhou, Xiaoxi Lin, Huilan Yang, Zhong Lu, Tianwen Gao, Yating Tu, Hongfu Xie, Qingshan Zheng, Ying Gu, Jining Tao, Xuejun Zhu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4881994?pdf=render
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has shown potentially beneficial results in treating port-wine stain, but its benefit-risk profile remains undefined. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PDT conducted with hemoporfin and a 532 nm continuous wave laser to treat port-wine stain clinically. PATIENTS AND METHODS:This randomized clinical trial was conducted in eight hospitals in China. Participants were adolescent and adult patients (age range: 14-65 years old) with port-wine stain. During stage 1 (day 1 to week 8) all patients were randomized at a 3:1 ratio to treatment (532 nm laser irradiation (96-120 J/cm2) with hemoporfin (5mg/kg; PDT-hemoporfin, n = 330)) or placebo groups (irradiation with placebo (PDT-placebo, n = 110)); during stage 2 (week 8 to 16) patients in both groups were offered treatment. Clinician-evaluators, who were blind to the study, classified each case on the following four-level scale according to assessment of before and after standardized pictures of the lesion area: no improvement: <20%; some improvement: 20-59%; great improvement: 60-89%; or nearly completely resolved: ≥90%. The primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients achieving at least some improvement at week 8. The secondary efficacy endpoints were proportion of patients achieving nearly completely resolved or at least great improvement at week 8, proportion of patients achieving early completely resolved, at least great improvement, or at least some improvement at week 16, and the corresponding satisfaction of the investigators and the patients (designated as 'excellent', 'good', 'moderate', or 'ineffective') at weeks 8 and 16. RESULTS:Compared to the PDT-placebo group, the PDT-hemoporfin group showed a significantly higher proportion of patients that achieved at least some improvement (89.7% [n = 295; 95% CI, 85.9%-92.5%] vs. 24.5% [n = 27; 95% CI, 17.4%-33.3%]) at week 8 (P < 0.0001) and higher improvements for all secondary efficacy endpoints. Treatment reactions occurred in 99.5% (n = 731; 95% CI, 98.7%-99.8%) of the PDT-hemoporfin treatments (n = 735). Hyperpigmentation occurred in 22.9 per 100 patient-treatments (n = 168; 95% CI, 20.0-26.0) in the PDT-hemoporfin treated patients. CONCLUSIONS:Hemoporfin-mediated PDT is an effective and safe treatment option for adolescent and adult patients with port-wine stain. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-TRC-08000213.
ISSN:1932-6203