Photodynamic Therapy for Actinic Keratoses : A Randomized Prospective Non-sponsored Cost-effectiveness Study of Daylight-mediated Treatment Compared with Light-emitting Diode Treatment

Show full item record



Permalink

http://hdl.handle.net/10138/161439

Citation

Neittaanmäki-Perttu , N , Gronroos , M , Karppinen , T T , Snellman , E & Rissanen , P 2016 , ' Photodynamic Therapy for Actinic Keratoses : A Randomized Prospective Non-sponsored Cost-effectiveness Study of Daylight-mediated Treatment Compared with Light-emitting Diode Treatment ' , Acta Dermato-Venereologica , vol. 96 , no. 2 , pp. 241-244 . https://doi.org/10.2340/00015555-2205

Title: Photodynamic Therapy for Actinic Keratoses : A Randomized Prospective Non-sponsored Cost-effectiveness Study of Daylight-mediated Treatment Compared with Light-emitting Diode Treatment
Author: Neittaanmäki-Perttu, Noora; Gronroos, Mari; Karppinen, Toni T.; Snellman, Erna; Rissanen, Pekka
Contributor: University of Helsinki, Department of Dermatology, Allergology and Venereology
Date: 2016
Language: eng
Number of pages: 4
Belongs to series: Acta Dermato-Venereologica
ISSN: 0001-5555
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/161439
Abstract: Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) is considered as effective as conventional PDT using artificial light (light-emitting diode (LED)-PDT) for treatment of actinic keratoses (AK). This randomized prospective non-sponsored study assessed the cost-effectiveness of DL-PDT compared with LED-PDT. Seventy patients with 210 AKs were randomized to DL-PDT or LED-PDT groups. Effectiveness was assessed at 6 months. The costs included societal costs and private costs, including the time patients spent in treatment. Results are presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The total costs per patient were significantly lower for DL-PDT ((sic) 132) compared with LED-PDT ((sic) 170), giving a cost saving of (sic)38 (p = 0.022). The estimated probabilities for patients' complete response were 0.429 for DL-PDT and 0.686 for LED-PDT; a difference in probability of being healed of 0.257. ICER showed a monetary gain of (sic) 147 per unit of effectiveness lost. DL-PDT is less costly and less effective than LED-PDT. In terms of cost-effectiveness analysis, DL-PDT provides lower value for money compared with LED-PDT.
Subject: actinic keratoses
cost-effectiveness
daylight-photodynamic therapy
BASAL-CELL CARCINOMA
METHYL-AMINOLEVULINATE
SOLAR KERATOSES
CLINICAL-TRIAL
RISK-FACTORS
DOUBLE-BLIND
SKIN-CANCER
MANAGEMENT
CREAM
EPIDEMIOLOGY
3121 General medicine, internal medicine and other clinical medicine
Rights:


Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
4498.pdf 244.0Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record