Home UVB phototherapy utilization among United States Medicare beneficiaries from 2000 to 2021

Lisa Kam,Eric Xia,Arash Mostaghimi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12971

2024-04-25

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 3, May 2024.

dermatology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Trends in Phototherapy Utilization, Payments, and Geographic Distribution: An Analysis of United States Medicare Part B From 2000 to 2021

Eric Xia,Lisa Kam,Arash Mostaghimi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.13008

2024-10-26

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 6, November 2024.

dermatology
The burning truth about light therapy: a retrospective analysis of the MAUDE database on UV phototherapy and photodynamic therapy complications 2013-2023

Samantha Jo Albucker,Shari R Lipner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-023-02765-5

2023-12-18

Abstract:Introduction: Phototherapy and photodynamic therapy (PDT) are ultraviolet light (UV) based therapies for patients with skin diseases, and are sometimes associated with potential adverse events (AE)s, including erythema, pain, pruritus, burns, and photoaging. Methods: We investigated UV phototherapy and PDT safety using the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)'s Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. The MAUDE database, including medical device reports (MDR)s informed by voluntary and obligatory reporters since 1991, was searched for AEs associated with UV phototherapy and PDT 1/1/91-3/1/23. Results: There were 59 UV phototherapy and 33 PDT related MDRs. Burns were the most common AE type for both phototherapy and PDT. The majority of phototherapy AEs occurred during 2021 (52.3%), and were significantly more likely to occur at home than in the clinic. Overall, 76.1% of MDRs associated with home light boxes were prescribed by online retailers, most of the MDRs (59.3%) mentioned that it is prohibited to sell phototherapy devices not prescribed by physicians, and only 8.5% noted poorly written home light box instructions. Discussion: The COVID-19 pandemic prohibited in-person light treatments, and social distancing requirements may have resulted in increased frequency of home-based light treatments. Hence, while at home treatment may be easier and more accessible, in-office physician supervised UV treatments are associated with less frequent AEs. Moreover, some phototherapy MDRs reported poorly written instructions accompanying the home light box, and some PDT MDRs documented patients receiving inadequate education regarding the procedure. With the rise of at-home treatment options and the ease of obtaining devices on the internet, it is physicians' duty to advise patients against self-treating with home light boxes without prescribed treatment regimens and educate patients that are considering home phototherapy to ensure safer patient experiences.
Characteristics of dermatology practices accepting Medicaid for phototherapy in the United States: A comprehensive nationwide cross‐sectional analysis

Seda Sahin,Eric J. Beltrami,Hao Feng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12973

2024-05-01

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 3, May 2024.

dermatology
A Retrospective Comparison Between Home and in‐Office NB‐UVB Efficacy for Patients With Mycosis Fungoides

Victoria Garfinkel,Joan S. Reisch,Heather Woodworth Goff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.13009

2024-11-23

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 6, November 2024.

dermatology
Home- vs Office-Based Narrowband UV-B Phototherapy for Patients With Psoriasis: The LITE Randomized Clinical Trial

Joel M Gelfand,April W Armstrong,Henry W Lim,Steven R Feldman,Sandra M Johnson,W C Cole Claiborne,Robert E Kalb,Jeannette Jakus,Aaron R Mangold,R Hal Flowers,Tina Bhutani,John R Durkin,Jerry Bagel,Scott Fretzin,Michael P Sheehan,James Krell,Margo Reeder,Jessica Kaffenberger,Francisca Kartono,Junko Takeshita,Alisha M Bridges,Eric Fielding,Umbereen S Nehal,Kenneth L Schaecher,Leah M Howard,Guy S Eakin,Suzette Báez,Brooke E Bishop,Robert C Fitzsimmons Jr,Maryte Papadopoulos,William B Song,Kristin A Linn,Rebecca A Hubbard,Daniel B Shin,Kristina Callis Duffin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.3897

2024-09-25

Abstract:Importance: Office-based phototherapy is cost-effective for psoriasis but difficult to access. Home-based phototherapy is patient preferred but has limited clinical data, particularly in patients with darker skin. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of home- vs office-based narrowband UV-B phototherapy for psoriasis. Design, setting, and participants: The Light Treatment Effectiveness study was an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial embedded in routine care at 42 academic and private clinical dermatology practices in the US. Enrollment occurred from March 1, 2019, to December 4, 2023, with follow-up through June 2024. Participants were 12 years and older with plaque or guttate psoriasis who were candidates for home- and office-based phototherapy. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive a home narrowband UV-B machine with guided mode dosimetry or routine care with office-based narrowband UV-B for 12 weeks, followed by an additional 12-week observation period. Main outcomes and measures: The coprimary effectiveness outcomes were Physician Global Assessment (PGA) dichotomized as clear/almost clear skin (score of ≤1) at the end of the intervention period and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score of 5 or lower (no to small effect on quality of life) at week 12. Results: Of 783 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 48.0 [15.5] years; 376 [48.0%] female), 393 received home-based phototherapy and 390 received office-based phototherapy, with 350 (44.7%) having skin phototype (SPT) I/II, 350 (44.7%) having SPT III/IV, and 83 (10.6%) having SPT V/VI. A total of 93 patients (11.9%) were receiving systemic treatment. At baseline, mean (SD) PGA was 2.7 (0.8) and DLQI was 12.2 (7.2). At week 12, 129 patients (32.8%) receiving home-based phototherapy and 100 patients (25.6%) receiving office-based phototherapy achieved clear/almost clear skin, and 206 (52.4%) and 131 (33.6%) achieved DLQI of 5 or lower, respectively. Home-based phototherapy was noninferior to office-based phototherapy for PGA and DLQI in the overall population and across all SPTs. Home-based phototherapy, compared to office-based phototherapy, was associated with better treatment adherence (202 patients [51.4%] vs 62 patients [15.9%]; P < .001), lower burden of indirect costs to patients, and more episodes of persistent erythema (466 of 7957 treatments [5.9%] vs 46 of 3934 treatments [1.2%]; P < .001). Both treatments were well tolerated with no discontinuations due to adverse events. Conclusions and relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, home-based phototherapy was as effective as office-based phototherapy for plaque or guttate psoriasis in everyday clinical practice and had less burden to patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03726489.
Phototherapy for vitiligo: Quality and readability of online health information

Krithika Nayudu,Rhea Malik,Stephanie Sanchez-Melendez,T J Hazen,Mihir K Patil,Vinod E Nambudiri,Stephanie Sanchez‐Melendez,T. J. Hazen,Mihir K. Patil,Vinod E. Nambudiri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12958

2024-03-16

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 2, March 2024.

dermatology
Phototherapy: Theory and practice

Bernadett Kurz,Mark Berneburg,Wolfgang Bäumler,Sigrid Karrer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ddg.15126

2023-07-26

JDDG - Journal of the German Society of Dermatology

Abstract:Summary Despite the development of highly effective biologics for skin diseases such as psoriasis or atopic dermatitis, UVA and UVB therapy, alone or in combination, are still essential components of various guidelines. Phototherapy is not only a first‐line treatment and highly effective for a number of skin diseases, but is also economical and has few side effects. The targeted use of UVA and UVB, if necessary, in combination with the photosensitizer psoralen in the context of PUVA therapy, enables the dermatologist to effectively treat a wide variety of skin diseases. Indications for phototherapy include epidermal diseases such as atopic dermatitis, psoriasis and vitiligo, as well as photodermatoses, mycosis fungoides, graft‐versus‐host disease and deep dermal diseases such as scleroderma. This article reviews the physical principles, molecular mechanisms, current treatment regimens, and individual indications for phototherapy and photochemotherapy.
Evaluation of Biological Effects and Transcriptome Changes Induced by LED-Based Narrow-Band UVB Phototherapy

Xinfeng Liu,Huaiyuan Chen,Zeyang Li,Liqiang Duan,Xibin Yang,Ping Jiang,Linyu Xu,Yan Gong,Kun Han

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/php.13643

Abstract:Ultraviolet (UV), particularly UVB, is widely used in the treatment of skin diseases including psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, vitiligo, mycosis fungoides and pruritus. Recently, there has been a trend of replacing broad-band UVB (BB-UVB) units with narrow-band UVB (NB-UVB), as studies have demonstrated that NB-UVB is more efficacious in the treatment of psoriasis. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the biological effects and transcriptome changes induced by light-emitting diode-based NB-UVB (NB-UVB LED) phototherapy. Cell viability and the cell migration ability were significantly decreased posttreatment, as well as apoptosis and ROS levels were remarkably increased. NB-UVB-induced S phase arrest was observed 12 h postirradiation. Bioinformatics analysis of transcriptome sequencing data revealed that NB-UVB LED irradiation induced dose-depended changes in multiple key signaling pathways, such as PI3K and cytoskeletal-related pathways. The depolymerization of cytoskeleton induced by NB-UVB was observed 24 h posttreatment. In addition, the expression levels of cytoskeleton-related proteins FN1, ITGB4, ITGA1, RAC2 and DOCK1 decreased significantly 12 h after irradiation. Our results indicated that NB-UVB LED may serve as a novel option for the development of NB-UVB phototherapy devices.
A Perspective on the Use of NB-UVB Phototherapy vs. PUVA Photochemotherapy

Sally H. Ibbotson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2018.00184

IF: 3.9

2018-07-02

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Narrowband UVB (NB-UVB) phototherapy and psoralen-UVA (PUVA) photochemotherapy are widely used phototherapeutic modalities for a range of skin diseases. The main indication for NB-UVB and PUVA therapies is psoriasis, and other key diagnoses include atopic eczema, vitiligo, cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL), and the photodermatoses. The decision on choice of phototherapy is important and NB-UVB is usually the primary choice. NB-UVB phototherapy is a safe and effective therapy which is usually considered when topical agents have failed. PUVA requires prior psoralen sensitization but remains a highly effective mainstay therapy, often used when NB-UVB fails, there is rapid relapse following NB-UVB or in specific indications, such as pustular or erythrodermic psoriasis. This review will provide a perspective on the main indications for use of NB-UVB and PUVA therapies and provide comparative information on these important dermatological treatments.

medicine, general & internal
PD12 Roadmap on how to set up home handheld phototherapy in the National Health Service: implementation of evidence-based treatment in the ‘real world’

Viktoria Eleftheriadou,Carla Francis,Joanne Hale,James Halpern

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae090.176

IF: 11.113

2024-06-28

British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract:Abstract Vitiligo is the most common pigmentary disorder, and affects around 0.4% of the population in the UK. Recently conducted, two large retrospective observational studies using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics databases demonstrated that adults with vitiligo have an increased risk of subsequently being diagnosed with new-onset depression (25%) and anxiety (23%). The studies also found that people with both vitiligo and a mental health comorbidity have increased use of primary care services and are twice as likely to have recorded time off work and unemployment. Interestingly, the majority of patients (85%) were not prescribed any vitiligo-related treatments within a year of diagnosis for vitiligo. Second-line treatment for vitiligo includes either whole-body or localized phototherapy. Traditionally, narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) is reserved for people with extensive vitiligo and is delivered in secondary care using full-body units, requiring regular hospital attendance. In the current National Health Service (NHS) crisis, many NHS dermatology departments offer phototherapy either to a very limited number of patients with vitiligo or not at all, due to constraints on phototherapy services. The British Association of Dermatologists guidelines recommend that limited vitiligo can be treated with handheld NB-UVB devices. This recommendation was based on the results of a large, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial of home handheld phototherapy combined with topical corticosteroid for people with active, limited vitiligo (HI-Light trial). The trial was completed almost 5 years ago; however, only one centre in Wales chose to continue with the home handheld phototherapy service on the NHS after the completion of the trial. A new, unique, national, tertiary, research and treatment centre for children and adults with vitiligo has recently been established in England. In our centre, we offer home handheld phototherapy to eligible patients, who are often referred from out of area, therefore making a combination of topicals and NB-UVB more accessible. We designed patient-facing literature, a special pro forma for vitiligo clinic, and several other documents to assist in safety assurance and quality improvement processes. We describe the pathway that we followed when establishing this new service in the NHS. We have trained 20 patients so far. We describe the safety and efficacy results of home handheld phototherapy combined with topical treatments such as calcineurin inhibitors and corticosteroids, as well as oral antioxidants. We hope that our roadmap will pave the way for a home handheld phototherapy service in other centres, which would make phototherapy more accessible for patients with a variety of skin diseases such as vitiligo, hand eczema and scalp psoriasis, among others.

dermatology
PD13 A UK single-centre prospective audit and clinical experience of developing an ultraviolet B phototherapy service using 308-nm excimer pulsed light for inflammatory skin disease

Haya Mohammed,Victoria Vilenchik,Alexandra Banner,Daniel Keith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae090.177

IF: 11.113

2024-06-28

British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract:Abstract Phototherapy is commonly recognized as a convenient treatment modality for inflammatory skin diseases (ISDs). It has seen significant technological advancements over the last 2 decades. With variable success, high running costs and demand for trained professionals, treatment outcomes in ISDs using cabinet phototherapy are limited. Due to its high efficacy and safety profile, 308-nm excimer pulsed light (EPL) represents an exciting and practical option in moderate-to-severe ISDs that are treatment resistant and difficult to reach, where only affected areas are targeted and overall fewer patient visits are required for clearance than with conventional phototherapy. A prospective single-centre cohort study was conducted on 36 patients with ISDs treated with EPL, including psoriasis (n = 14), palmoplantar pustular psoriasis (n = 6), vitiligo (n = 2), necrobiosis lipoidica (n = 3), vitiligo (n = 2) and dermatosis (n = 9). The number of sessions required ranged from 4 to 18, with a maximum fluence between 250 and 850 mJ cm−2 among patients. The primary outcome involved assessing lesions post-EPL treatment using Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) scores including ‘much better’, ‘better’, ‘no difference’ or ‘worsened’. Secondary outcomes included occurrence of complications and comparison of Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) scores before and after EPL. At the end of each completed EPL treatment course, lasting an average of six sessions in total, and requiring an average maximum fluence of 350 mJ cm−2, 72% (n = 26) of patients achieved clearance and were found to have ‘much better’ or ‘better’ lesion outcomes when reviewing PGA scores. A significant reduction in post-EPL DLQI in 28% (n = 10) of patients was also found, with an average score reduction by 4. No complications were reported in 94% of patients (n = 34), with minor post-EPL burn found in 6% of patients (n = 2) but high overall patient satisfaction. In conclusion, our study contributes further supporting evidence to the scarce dermatological literature surrounding the successful use of EPL as a powerful treatment modality in inflammatory skin disease, especially if recalcitrant. Large studies including randomized controlled trials are necessary to help validate these promising results and determine optimal dosing regimens, long-term efficacy and patient satisfaction.

dermatology
Carcinogenic risk in patients treated with UVA‐1 phototherapy: A 5‐year retrospective study

Davide Cosetti,Vittoria Cioppa,Pietro Rubegni,Emanuele Trovato

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12975

2024-05-26

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 3, May 2024.

dermatology
Whole‐body and targeted narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy effectively stabilize acral vitiligo with negligible repigmentation beyond wrists and ankles: Results from a split‐body randomized controlled trial

Anish Thind,Keshavamurthy Vinay,Hitaishi Mehta,Anuradha Bishnoi,Muthu Sendhil Kumaran,Davinder Parsad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12960

2024-03-15

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 2, March 2024.

dermatology
Carcinogenic effects of prolonged daily low-emission phototherapy in psoriasis

Sylvie Mireille Franken,Sander Wiebrand Spiekstra,Taco Waaijman,Birgit Lissenberg-Witte,Thomas Rustemeyer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12767

Abstract:Background: Low-dose UV treatment has been shown to be effective in mild psoriasis. However, the prolonged use of this treatment modality may raise concerns about its safety. These concerns are mainly focused on potential carcinogenic risks and overuse of this treatment modality. Objectives: This study was set out to evaluate possible carcinogenic risks of prolonged low-dose phototherapy. Methods: Three groups of psoriasis patients were evaluated: patients with local treatment only (n = 15); low-dose UV treatment at home for at least 18 months (n = 39); and patients with conventional NB-UVB (n = 8). Patients underwent visual inspection for signs of photoageing, and p53, CPDs and γH2AX were measured in skin biopsies. Patients undergoing low-dose phototherapy answered a survey about their recent patterns of use in a survey. Results: In the skin biopsies, low-dose UV treatment caused a lower amount of CPDs (p = .016) and p53 (p = .015) than NB-UVB. γH2AX did not show a significant difference. Self-report in patients undergoing low-dose phototherapy showed only one case of overuse (2.7%). Visual skin inspection showed no difference in signs of photoageing in the three groups. Conclusion: Prolonged treatment with low-dose UV for 18 months appears at least as safe as a course of conventional NB-UVB.
Phototherapy for vitiligo: A narrative review on the clinical and molecular aspects, and recent literature

Anuradha Bishnoi,Davinder Parsad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12968

2024-04-19

Photodermatology Photoimmunology & Photomedicine

Abstract:Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Photomedicine, Volume 40, Issue 3, May 2024.

dermatology
Photobiomodulation CME Part II: Clinical Applications in Dermatology

Jessica Mineroff,Jalal Maghfour,David M Ozog,Henry W Lim,Indermeet Kohli,Jared Jagdeo,David D. Ozog,Henry W. Lim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2023.10.074

IF: 15.487

2024-02-01

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

Abstract:Photobiomodulation (PBM) is an emerging treatment modality in dermatology with increasing office and home-based use. PBM is the use of various light sources in the red light (620-700 nm) and near-infrared (700-1440 nm) spectrum as a form of light therapy. PBM is often administered through low-level lasers or light-emitting diodes. Studies show that PBM can be used effectively to treat conditions secondary to cancer therapies, alopecia, ulcers, herpes simplex virus, acne, skin rejuvenation, wounds, and scars. PBM offers patients many benefits compared to other treatments. It is noninvasive, cost-effective, convenient for patients, and offers a favorable safety profile. PBM can be used as an alternative or adjuvant to other treatment modalities including pharmacotherapy. It is important for dermatologists to gain a better clinical understanding of PBM for in-office administration and to counsel patients on proper application for home-use devices to best manage safety and expectations as this technology develops. PBM wavelengths can induce varied biological effects in diverse skin types, races, and ethnicities; therefore, it is also important for dermatologists to properly counsel their skin of color patients who undergo PBM treatments. Future clinical trials are necessary to produce standardized recommendations across conditions and skin types.

dermatology
Ultraviolet A1 for the Treatment of Cutaneous Diseases

Chen Lihong,Zheng Jie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-4173.2014.05.007

2014-01-01

International Journal of Dermatology and Venereology

Abstract:Since ultraviolet A1 (UVA1) can penetrate into deep layers of the skin,induce the apoptosis of T cells,down-regulate multiple cytokines,activate endothelial cells and promote neovascularization,it has been used to treat many dermatoses over the last three decades.There have been evidences from randomized control and cohort studies for the application of UVA1 phototherapy in atopic dermatitis,localized scleroderma and systemic lupus erythematosus.Other indications of UVA1 phototherapy are cutaneous T cell lymphoma,systemic scleroderma,pretibial myxedema,prurigo nodularis,etc.Compared with the other phototherapy regimens,UVA1 phototherapy shows less short-term side effects.However,little is known about long-term side effects of UVA1 phototherapy,and long-term follow-up studies are required.
Trends in psoriasis treatment 2005 to 2018: Declining phototherapy utilization and concomitant increased use of biologics

Mytrang H.,Ziv Schwartz,Sajjad Abedian,Shari R. Lipner,Mytrang H. Do

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dth.14276

2020-09-18

Dermatologic Therapy

Abstract:Supporting InformationFilenameDescriptiondth14276-sup-0001-TableS1.docxWord 2007 document , 34 KB Supplementary table: Demographic information for patients who were diagnosed with psoriasis, pruritus, cutaneous T‐cell lymphoma at Weill Cornell Medicine 2005‐2018.Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

dermatology
UVB-Induced Microvesicle Particle Release and Its Effects on the Cutaneous Microenvironment

Timothy C. Frommeyer,Michael M. Gilbert,Garrett V. Brittain,Tongfan Wu,Trang Q. Nguyen,Craig A. Rohan,Jeffrey B. Travers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.880850

IF: 7.3

2022-05-07

Frontiers in Immunology

Abstract:Ultraviolet B radiation (UVB) has profound effects on human skin that results in a broad spectrum of immunological local and systemic responses and is the major cause of skin carcinogenesis. One important area of study in photobiology is how UVB is translated into effector signals. As the skin is exposed to UVB light, subcellular microvesicle particles (MVP), a subtype of bioactive extracellular vesicles, are released causing a variety of local and systemic immunological effects. In this review, we highlight keratinocyte MVP release in keratinocytes in response to UVB. Specifically, Platelet-activating factor receptor agonists generated by UVB result in MVP released from keratinocytes. The downstream effects of MVP release include the ability of these subcellular particles to transport agents including the glycerophosphocholine-derived lipid mediator Platelet-activating factor (PAF). Moreover, even though UVB is only absorbed in the epidermis, it appears that PAF release from MVPs also mediates systemic immunosuppression and enhances tumor growth and metastasis. Tumor cells expressing PAF receptors can use this mechanism to evade chemotherapy responses, leading to treatment resistance for advanced cancers such as melanoma. Furthermore, novel pharmacological agents provide greater insight into the UVB-induced immune response pathway and a potential target for pharmacological intervention. This review outlines the need to more clearly elucidate the mechanism linking UVB-irradiation with the cutaneous immune response and its pathological manifestations. An improved understanding of this process can result in new insights and treatment strategies for UVB-related disorders from carcinogenesis to photosensitivity.

immunology
Photoprotection: Current developments and controversies

Giovanni Pellacani,Henry W Lim,Eggert Stockfleth,Vincent Sibaud,Ariadna Ortiz Brugués,Markéta Saint Aroman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.19677

Abstract:This review aimed at summarizing some of the key points that were discussed during the photoprotection session at the International Forum of Dermatology in 2022. This international conference was designed to address prominent topics of clinical dermatology in a holistic way, allowing to articulate multiple viewpoints. Therefore, this review does not claim to be exhaustive, but is instead intended to give an overview of recent developments and ongoing controversies in the field of photoprotection. Cumulative ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure is the major aetiological factor in the development of photoageing, photoimunosuppression and photocarcinogenesis. UVA (320-400 nm) penetrates into the dermis and damages DNA and other intracellular and acellular targets primarily by generating reactive oxygen species (ROS). It is the major contributor to photoageing, characterized by fine and coarse wrinkles, dyspigmentation and loss of elasticity. UVB (290-320 nm) is responsible for sunburns through direct damage to DNA by the formation of 6-4 cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) and pyrimidine 6-4 pyrimidone photoproducts. Both UVA and UVB exposure increase the risk of basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma. In recent years, visible light (VL; 400-700 nm) has also been implicated in the exacerbation of conditions aggravated by sun exposure such as hyperpigmentation and melasma. Photoprotection is a critical health strategy to reduce the deleterious effects of UVR and VL. Comprehensive photoprotection strategies include staying in the shade when outdoors, wearing photoprotective clothing including a wide-brimmed hat, and sunglasses, and the use of sunscreen. Due to the absorption of UV filters, the safety of sunscreens has been questioned. Newer sunscreens are becoming available with filters with absorption even beyond the UV spectrum, offering enhanced protection compared with older products. Prevention of photocarcinogenesis, sun-induced or sunlight-exacerbated hyperpigmentary conditions and drug-induced photosensitivity is an important reason for adopting comprehensive photoprotection strategies.

Home UVB phototherapy utilization among United States Medicare beneficiaries from 2000 to 2021

Trends in Phototherapy Utilization, Payments, and Geographic Distribution: An Analysis of United States Medicare Part B From 2000 to 2021

The burning truth about light therapy: a retrospective analysis of the MAUDE database on UV phototherapy and photodynamic therapy complications 2013-2023

Characteristics of dermatology practices accepting Medicaid for phototherapy in the United States: A comprehensive nationwide cross‐sectional analysis

A Retrospective Comparison Between Home and in‐Office NB‐UVB Efficacy for Patients With Mycosis Fungoides

Home- vs Office-Based Narrowband UV-B Phototherapy for Patients With Psoriasis: The LITE Randomized Clinical Trial

Phototherapy for vitiligo: Quality and readability of online health information

Phototherapy: Theory and practice

Evaluation of Biological Effects and Transcriptome Changes Induced by LED-Based Narrow-Band UVB Phototherapy

A Perspective on the Use of NB-UVB Phototherapy vs. PUVA Photochemotherapy

PD12 Roadmap on how to set up home handheld phototherapy in the National Health Service: implementation of evidence-based treatment in the ‘real world’

PD13 A UK single-centre prospective audit and clinical experience of developing an ultraviolet B phototherapy service using 308-nm excimer pulsed light for inflammatory skin disease

Carcinogenic risk in patients treated with UVA‐1 phototherapy: A 5‐year retrospective study

Whole‐body and targeted narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy effectively stabilize acral vitiligo with negligible repigmentation beyond wrists and ankles: Results from a split‐body randomized controlled trial

Carcinogenic effects of prolonged daily low-emission phototherapy in psoriasis

Phototherapy for vitiligo: A narrative review on the clinical and molecular aspects, and recent literature

Photobiomodulation CME Part II: Clinical Applications in Dermatology

Ultraviolet A1 for the Treatment of Cutaneous Diseases

Trends in psoriasis treatment 2005 to 2018: Declining phototherapy utilization and concomitant increased use of biologics

UVB-Induced Microvesicle Particle Release and Its Effects on the Cutaneous Microenvironment

Photoprotection: Current developments and controversies