Hexyl aminolevulinate, 5‐aminolevulinic acid nanoemulsion, and methyl aminolevulinate in photodynamic therapy of non‐aggressive basal cell carcinomas : A non‐sponsored, randomized, prospective and double‐blinded trial

Abstract

Background In the photodynamic therapy (PDT) of non‐aggressive basal cell carcinomas (BCCs), 5‐aminolevulinic acid nanoemulsion (BF‐200ALA) has shown non‐inferior efficacy when compared with methyl aminolevulinate (MAL), a widely used photosensitizer. Hexyl aminolevulinate (HAL) is an interesting alternative photosensitizer. To our knowledge, this is the first study using HAL‐PDT in the treatment of BCCs.

Objectives To compare the histological clearance, tolerability (pain and post‐treatment reaction), and cosmetic outcome of MAL, BF‐200 ALA, and low‐concentration HAL in the PDT of non‐aggressive BCCs.

Methods Ninety‐eight histologically verified non‐aggressive BCCs met the inclusion criteria, and 54 patients with 95 lesions completed the study. The lesions were randomized to receive LED‐PDT in two repeated treatments with MAL, BF‐200 ALA, or HAL. Efficacy was assessed both clinically and confirmed histologically at three months by blinded observers. Furthermore, cosmetic outcome, pain, post‐treatment reactions fluorescence, and photobleaching were evaluated.

Results According to intention‐to‐treat analyses, the histologically confirmed lesion clearance was 93.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 79.9–98.3) for MAL, 90.9% (95% CI = 76.4–96.9) for BF‐200 ALA, and 87.9% (95% CI = 72.7–95.2) for HAL, with no differences between the arms (p=0.84). There were no differences between the arms as regards pain, post‐treatment reactions, or cosmetic outcome.

Conclusions PDT with low‐concentration HAL and BF‐200 ALA have a similar efficacy, tolerability, and cosmetic outcome compared to MAL. HAL is an interesting new option in dermatological PDT, since good efficacy is achieved with a low concentration.