Therapeutic approaches for actinic cheilitis: therapeutic efficacy and malignant transformation after treatment

Decreased Nuclear Immunoexpression of ING3 is a Frequent Event in Lip Carcinogenesis

PURPOSE

Evaluate the immunohistochemical expression of the ING3 in actinic cheilitis and squamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip.

METHODS

Forty-five specimens of actinic cheilitis and 48 specimens of squamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip were submitted to immunohistochemical detection of ING3. The protein expression in different cellular sublocations was compared between the two groups, and associations with the clinicopathological variables were analyzed. A significance level of 5% was adopted for all tests.

RESULTS

Deaths were significantly more frequent in tumors with a high histopathological risk score (p < 0.05). In actinic cheilitis, significant differences were found in the nucleus-cytoplasmic expression of ING3 and expression restricted to the cytoplasm with binary histopathological grading (p < 0.05). In squamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip, there was no statistically significant difference when comparing ING3 expressions with clinical and morphological parameters (p > 0.05). Nucleo-cytoplasmic ING3 expression was significantly lower in squamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip when compared to actinic cheilitis (p < 0.05) and the expression restricted to the cytoplasm was significantly higher in squamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that there is a marked decrease in the nuclear expression of ING3 as malignant progression occurs, indicating an impaired tumor suppressor function of this protein in actinic cheilitis and squamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip.

Revisiting the evidence of photodynamic therapy for oral potentially malignant disorders and oral squamous cell carcinoma: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

This study summarized the available evidence about the use of photodynamic therapy (PDT) for the management of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).

METHODS

An overview of systematic reviews was undertaken based on the 2020 PRISMA statement. Electronic searches were performed in five databases. Studies published up to November 2022 were included. Risk of bias was assessed with the AMSTAR 2 tool.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies enrolling 9,245 individuals with OPMD (n=7,487) or OSCC (n=1,758) met the selection criteria. All studies examined the efficacy and/or safety of PDT. OPMD were investigated individually in 82.8% of the studies, the most common being oral lichen planus and actinic cheilitis. OSCC was addressed separately in 10.3% of the studies, while only 6.9% evaluated both OPMD and OSCC. Fourteen different types of photosensitizers were described. PDT was used according to the following setting parameters: 417-670 nm, 10-500 mW/cm², 1.5-200 J/cm², and 0.5-143 minutes. Regarding OPMD, leukoerythroplakia showed the best response rates, while oral lichen planus presented a partial or no response in nearly 75% of documented cases. A complete response was observed in 85.9% of OSCC cases, while 14.1% had no resolution.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the response to PDT depended on the type of OPMD/OSCC and the parameters used. Although PDT is an emerging candidate for the treatment of OPMD and OSCC, there is heterogeneity of the methodologies used and the clinical data obtained, particularly regarding the follow-up period.

Randomized Clinical Trial of Conventional versus Indoor Daylight Photodynamic Therapy for Treatment of Actinic Cheilitis

Introduction

Actinic cheilitis (AC) is the biologic precursor of invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the vermilion, and different treatment options have been investigated, but their efficacy is hampered by local inflammation, pain and slow recovery. Daylight photodynamic therapy (dl-PDT) has been demonstrated to represent a valuable treatment option for AC, but its feasibility is limited by weather conditions and latitude.

Methods

Our study proposed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of conventional photodynamic therapy (c-PDT) and indoor daylight photodynamic therapy (idl-PDT) with a white LED lamp for the treatment of AC. Sixteen patients were enrolled in the study: 8 (50%) treated with c-PDT and 8 (50%) treated with idl-PDT. All patients completed the study protocol.

Results

Both idl-PDT and c-PDT were demonstrated to be highly effective in terms of reduction of the cumulative lesional area and severity of the clinical score. Neither treatment was inferior to the other. The inflammatory reaction and the pain scores were milder with idl-PDT, whereas the cosmetic outcome was not different.

Conclusion

The present findings confirm that idl-PDT can represent a valid therapeutic strategy for AC patients as well, despite the procedural difficulties and the risk of poor tolerability related to the body site.

Actinic Cheilitis - From Risk Factors to Therapy

Actinic cheilitis or solar cheilosis is considered a precursor of malignancy or even an in situ squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lip, located most frequently on the lower lip. Actinic cheilitis (AC) has a higher likelihood of developing into invasive SCC of the lip, which is one of the deadliest non-melanoma skin cancers. Risk factors include chronic UV exposure, increasing age, male gender, fair phototypes, chronic scarring, immunosuppressive therapy, and tobacco use. From a clinical point of view, AC is characterized by dryness, scaling, atrophy, indistinct borders, and erosions. Ulceration and the appearance of a nodule often suggest the progression to invasive SCC. Dermoscopic examination reveals white structureless areas, scales, erosions, and white halos of the vermilion. Reflectance confocal microscopy shows disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, an atypical honeycomb pattern, solar elastosis, and dilated and tortuous blood vessels with increased blood flow. The rate of malignant transformation ranges from 10 to 30% and early diagnoses and treatment are essential in preventing the development of invasive SCC. Optimal treatment has not been established yet, but invasive and topical treatments can be tried. The present paper aims to review the existing data regarding epidemiology, risk factors, clinical picture, non-invasive imaging, diagnosis, and therapy in AC.

Assembling a consensus on actinic cheilitis: A Delphi study

AIMS

To discuss the terminology to define and classify actinic cheilitis (AC) and to build a consensus on the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to AC.

METHODS

Two-round Delphi study using a questionnaire including 34 closed sentences (9 on terminology and taxonomy, 5 on potential for malignant transformation, 12 on diagnostic aspects, 8 on treatment) and 8 open questions. Experts' agreement was rated using a Likert scale (1-7).

RESULTS

A consensus was reached on 24 out 34 statements (73.5%) and on 5 out of 8 (62.5%) close-ended questions. The response rate was identical in both rounds (attrition of 0%). AC is the term with the highest agreement (median of 7 (strongly agree; IQR: 6-7)) and the lowest dispersion (VC = 21.33). 'Potentially malignant disorder' was the preferred classification group for AC (median of 7) and 85.6% of participants showing some level of agreement (CV < 50). Experts (66.75%) consider AC a clinical term (median: 7; IQR: 4-7) and believe definitive diagnosis can be made clinically (median: 6; IQR: 5-7), particularly by inspection and palpation (median: 5; IQR: 4-6). Histopathological confirmation is mandatory for the management of AC (median: 5; IQR: 2.5-7), even for homogeneous lesions (median: 5; IQR: 3.5-6). Consensus was reached on all treatment statements (VC < 50).

CONCLUSIONS

AC is a potentially malignant disorder with a significant lack of agreement on diagnostic criteria, procedures, biopsy indications and the importance of techniques to assist in biopsy. A consensus was reached on nomenclature and management of this disorder.