Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The value of additional photoprotection provided by use of high SPF sunscreens is controversial and limited clinical evidence exists. OBJECTIVE:To compare the sunburn protection provided by SPF100+ and SPF50+ sunscreen in conditions of actual use. METHODS:199 healthy men and women (≥18 years) participated in a natural sunlight, single exposure, split face, randomized, double blind study in Vail, Colorado. Each participant wore both sunscreens simultaneously during activities with no usage restrictions other than treatment area designation. Erythema was clinically assessed the day following exposure. Comparative efficacy was evaluated through bilateral comparison of sunburn between treatment areas and erythema score as evaluated separately for each treatment area. RESULTS:Following an average 6.1 ± 1.3 hours of sun exposure, investigator blinded evaluation identified 55.3% (110/199) of the participants as more sunburned on the SPF50+ and 5% (10/199) on the SPF100+ protected side. Post exposure, 40.7% (81/199) of the participants exhibited increased erythema scores ≥ 1 on the SPF50+ protected side as compared to 13.6% (27/199) on the SPF100+. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Single day exposure may not extrapolate to benefits of longer-term protection. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:SPF100+ sunscreen was significantly more effective in protecting against sunburn than SPF50+ sunscreen in actual-use conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT02952235).

BACKGROUND:Patients with skin lesions suspicious for skin cancer or atypical melanocytic nevi of uncertain malignant potential often present to dermatologists, who may have variable dermoscopy triage clinical experience. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the clinical utility of a digital dermoscopy image-based artificial intelligence algorithm (DDI-AI device) on the diagnosis and management of skin cancers by dermatologists. METHODS:Thirty-six United States board-certified dermatologists evaluated 50 clinical images and 50 digital dermoscopy images of the same skin lesions (25 malignant and 25 benign), first without and then with knowledge of the DDI-AI device output. Participants indicated whether they thought the lesion was likely benign (unremarkable) or malignant (suspicious). RESULTS:The management sensitivity of dermatologists using the DDI-AI device was 91.1%, compared to 84.3% with DDI, and 70.0% with clinical images. The management specificity was 71.0%, compared to 68.4% and 64.9%, respectively. The diagnostic sensitivity of dermatologists using the DDI-AI device was 86.1%, compared to 78.8% with DDI, and 63.4% with clinical images. Diagnostic specificity using the DDI-AI device increased to 80.7%, compared to 75.9% and 73.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The use of the DDI-AI device may quickly, safely, and effectively improve dermoscopy performance, skin cancer diagnosis, and management when used by dermatologists, independent of training and experience.

Sunscreen greatly reduces the risk of skin cancer and is recommended as a critical component of sun protection. There is limited literature on patient preferences for sunscreen characteristics. A cross-sectional survey was administered to patients in an urban city and rural area in the United States. Sun Protection Factor (SPF) was consistently the most important factor for patients when selecting sunscreen. However, numerous preferences for sunscreen characteristics vary between the 2 regions, including dermatologist recommendation, texture, ingredients, cost, broad-spectrum, and brand. Gaps in patient knowledge of sunscreen recommendations may be present and further educational programs may be necessary. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(8):e171-e172. doi:10.36849/JDD.8449.

Background: Actinic keratosis is a very common disease that affects over 40 million people in the United States. In addition to the clinically visible lesion, patients may present with surrounding field cancerization based on their history of ultraviolet exposure. While lesiondirected therapy such as cryosurgery can effectively treat individual actinic keratoses it does not treat subclinical lesions or field cancerization. Objective: To create consensus recommendations on the role of field cancerization in selecting appropriate therapy for actinic keratoses. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase was conducted using the keywords "actinic keratos*," "treatment," and "field cancerization" for English-language original research articles without date restrictions. Articles were included that either discussed the role of FC in treating AKs or compared various AK field therapies. The relevant articles were then distributed to a panel of nine dermatologists with significant expertise in managing AKs. Each panelist reviewed the articles and assigned them a level of evidence based on Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) criteria. The panel then convened on to discuss the studies and develop consensus statements on the role of FC in selecting AK therapy. The panel utilized a modified Delphi process to approve the adoption of each statement and gave each one a strength of recommendation based on SORT criteria. Results: The initial literature search produced 243 articles that met search criteria. After a thorough screening of these articles for relevance to the research question, 21 articles were chosen to be reviewed by the panel and assigned a level of evidence. Of the 21 articles that were reviewed, the panel assigned level 1 evidence to three articles, level 2 evidence to six articles, and level 3 evidence to twelve articles. The panel created seven consensus statements related to AK management and FC. All seven statements received a unanimous (9/9) vote for adoption. Each of the statements was given a strength of recommendation according to sort criteria. Conclusion: Field cancerization due to chronic ultraviolet exposure leads to subclinical AK lesions in addition to lesions that are clinically apparent. In order to address these lesions, field therapy is an important component of an adequate regimen and can be used in conjunction with lesion-directed therapy for optimal results.