Loading…
Comparison of three light doses in the photodynamic treatment of actinic keratosis using mathematical modeling
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an emerging treatment modality for various diseases, especially for cancer therapy. Although high efficacy is demonstrated for PDT using standardized protocols in nonhyperkeratotic actinic keratoses, alternative light doses expected to increase efficiency, to reduce adv...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of biomedical optics 2015-05, Vol.20 (5), p.058001-058001 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an emerging treatment modality for various diseases, especially for cancer therapy. Although high efficacy is demonstrated for PDT using standardized protocols in nonhyperkeratotic actinic keratoses, alternative light doses expected to increase efficiency, to reduce adverse effects or to expand the use of PDT, are still being evaluated and refined. We propose a comparison of the three most common light doses in the treatment of actinic keratosis with 5-aminolevulinic acid PDT through mathematical modeling. The proposed model is based on an iterative procedure that involves determination of the local fluence rate, updating of the local optical properties, and estimation of the local damage induced by the therapy. This model was applied on a simplified skin sample model including an actinic keratosis lesion, with three different light doses (red light dose, 37 J/cm2, 75 mW/cm2, 500 s; blue light dose, 10 J/cm2, 10 mW/cm2, 1000 s; and daylight dose, 9000 s). Results analysis shows that the three studied light doses, although all efficient, lead to variable local damage. Defining reference damage enables the nonoptimal parameters for the current light doses to be refined and the treatment to be more suitable. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1083-3668 1560-2281 |
DOI: | 10.1117/1.JBO.20.5.058001 |