Aaron M Drucker1, Gaelen P Adam2, Valerie Rofeberg2, Abhilash Gazula2, Bryant Smith2, Farah Moustafa3, Martin A Weinstock3, Thomas A Trikalinos2. 1. Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, and University of Toronto and Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (A.M.D.). 2. Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island (G.P.A., V.R., A.G., B.S., T.A.T.). 3. Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island (F.M., M.A.W.).
Abstract
Background: Most interventions for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) have not been compared in head-to-head randomized trials. Purpose: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of treatments of primary BCC in adults. Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase from inception to May 2018; reference lists of guidelines and systematic reviews; and a search of ClinicalTrials.gov in August 2016. Study Selection: Comparative studies of treatments currently used in adults with primary BCC. Data Extraction: One investigator extracted data on recurrence, histologic clearance, clinical clearance, cosmetic outcomes, quality of life, and mortality, and a second reviewer verified extractions. Several investigators evaluated risk of bias for each study. Data Synthesis: Forty randomized trials and 5 nonrandomized studies compared 18 interventions in 9 categories. Relative intervention effects and mean outcome frequencies were estimated using frequentist network meta-analyses. Estimated recurrence rates were similar for excision (3.8% [95% CI, 1.5% to 9.5%]), Mohs surgery (3.8% [CI, 0.7% to 18.2%]), curettage and diathermy (6.9% [CI, 0.9% to 36.6%]), and external-beam radiation (3.5% [CI, 0.7% to 16.8%]). Recurrence rates were higher for cryotherapy (22.3% [CI, 10.2% to 42.0%]), curettage and cryotherapy (19.9% [CI, 4.6% to 56.1%]), 5-fluorouracil (18.8% [CI, 10.1% to 32.5%]), imiquimod (14.1% [CI, 5.4% to 32.4%]), and photodynamic therapy using methyl-aminolevulinic acid (18.8% [CI, 10.1% to 32.5%]) or aminolevulinic acid (16.6% [CI, 7.5% to 32.8%]). The proportion of patients reporting good or better cosmetic outcomes was better for photodynamic therapy using methyl-aminolevulinic acid (93.8% [CI, 79.2% to 98.3%]) or aminolevulinic acid (95.8% [CI, 84.2% to 99.0%]) than for excision (77.8% [CI, 44.8% to 93.8%]) or cryotherapy (51.1% [CI, 15.8% to 85.4%]). Data on quality of life and mortality were too sparse for quantitative synthesis. Limitation: Data are sparse, and effect estimates are imprecise and informed by indirect comparisons. Conclusion: Surgical treatments and external-beam radiation have low recurrence rates for the treatment of low-risk BCC, but substantial uncertainty exists about their comparative effectiveness versus other treatments. Gaps remain regarding high-risk BCC subtypes and important outcomes, including costs. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42016043353).
Background: Most interventions for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) have not been compared in head-to-head randomized trials. Purpose: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of treatments of primary BCC in adults. Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase from inception to May 2018; reference lists of guidelines and systematic reviews; and a search of ClinicalTrials.gov in August 2016. Study Selection: Comparative studies of treatments currently used in adults with primary BCC. Data Extraction: One investigator extracted data on recurrence, histologic clearance, clinical clearance, cosmetic outcomes, quality of life, and mortality, and a second reviewer verified extractions. Several investigators evaluated risk of bias for each study. Data Synthesis: Forty randomized trials and 5 nonrandomized studies compared 18 interventions in 9 categories. Relative intervention effects and mean outcome frequencies were estimated using frequentist network meta-analyses. Estimated recurrence rates were similar for excision (3.8% [95% CI, 1.5% to 9.5%]), Mohs surgery (3.8% [CI, 0.7% to 18.2%]), curettage and diathermy (6.9% [CI, 0.9% to 36.6%]), and external-beam radiation (3.5% [CI, 0.7% to 16.8%]). Recurrence rates were higher for cryotherapy (22.3% [CI, 10.2% to 42.0%]), curettage and cryotherapy (19.9% [CI, 4.6% to 56.1%]), 5-fluorouracil (18.8% [CI, 10.1% to 32.5%]), imiquimod (14.1% [CI, 5.4% to 32.4%]), and photodynamic therapy using methyl-aminolevulinic acid (18.8% [CI, 10.1% to 32.5%]) or aminolevulinic acid (16.6% [CI, 7.5% to 32.8%]). The proportion of patients reporting good or better cosmetic outcomes was better for photodynamic therapy using methyl-aminolevulinic acid (93.8% [CI, 79.2% to 98.3%]) or aminolevulinic acid (95.8% [CI, 84.2% to 99.0%]) than for excision (77.8% [CI, 44.8% to 93.8%]) or cryotherapy (51.1% [CI, 15.8% to 85.4%]). Data on quality of life and mortality were too sparse for quantitative synthesis. Limitation: Data are sparse, and effect estimates are imprecise and informed by indirect comparisons. Conclusion: Surgical treatments and external-beam radiation have low recurrence rates for the treatment of low-risk BCC, but substantial uncertainty exists about their comparative effectiveness versus other treatments. Gaps remain regarding high-risk BCC subtypes and important outcomes, including costs. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42016043353).
Authors: Saud Aleissa; Cristian Navarrete-Dechent; Miguel Cordova; Aditi Sahu; Stephen W Dusza; William Phillips; Anthony Rossi; Erica Lee; Kishwer S Nehal Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2019-10-18 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Alejandra Tomás-Velázquez; Onofre Sanmartin-Jiménez; Joan R Garcés; Manuel A Rodríguez-Prieto; Verónica Ruiz-Salas; Esther De Eusebio-Murillo; Román Miñano-Medrano; Begoña Escutia-Muñoz; Ángeles Flórez-Menéndez; Juan L Artola-Igarza; Alberto Alfaro-Rubio; Pilar Gil; Yolanda Delgado-Jiménez; Julia M Sanchez-Schmidt; Irati Allende-Markixana; María L Alonso-Pacheco; Beatriz García-Bracamonte; Pablo De la Cueva-Dobao; Raquel Navarro-Tejedor; Cristina Ciudad-Blanco; Lucía Carnero-González; Hugo Vázquez-Veiga; Natividad Cano-Martínez; Eva Vilarrasa-Rull; Pedro Sanchez-Sambucety; José L López-Estebaranz; Rafael Botella-Estrada; Beatriz Gonzalez-Sixto; Antonio Martorell-Calatayud; Victoriano Morales-Gordillo; Agustí Toll-Abelló; Izascun Ocerin-Guerra; Matías Mayor-Arenal; Ricardo Suárez-Fernández; Laura Sainz-Gaspar; Miguel A Descalzo; Ignacio García-Doval; Pedro Redondo Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2021-11-24 Impact factor: 3.875
Authors: Kivanc Kose; Christi Alessi Fox; Anthony Rossi; Manu Jain; Miguel Cordova; Stephen W Dusza; Moira Ragazzi; Stefano Gardini; Elvira Moscarella; Alba Diaz; Ramon Pigem; Salvador Gonzalez; Antoni Bennassar; Cristina Carrera; Caterina Longo; Milind Rajadhyaksha; Kishwer S Nehal Journal: J Cutan Pathol Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 1.587
Authors: Allen G Strickler; Payal Shah; Shirin Bajaj; Richard Mizuguchi; Rajiv I Nijhawan; Mercy Odueyungbo; Anthony Rossi; Désirée Ratner Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 15.487
Authors: Andrew M Ferry; Shayan M Sarrami; Pierce C Hollier; Caitlin F Gerich; James F Thornton Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2020-12-22