Search

Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) induces skin cancer. The combination of UVR and red tattoos may be associated with increased risk of skin cancer due to potential carcinogens in tattoo inks. This combination has not been studied previously. Immunocompetent C3.Cg/TifBomTac hairless mice (n=99) were tattooed on their back with a popular red tattoo ink. This often used ink is banned for use on humans because of high content of the potential carcinogen 2-anisidine. Half of the mice were irradiated with three standard erythema doses UVR thrice weekly. Time to induction of first, second and third squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) was measured. All UV-irradiated mice developed SCCs. The time to the onset of the first and second tumor was identical in the red-tattooed group compared with the control group (182 vs 186 days and 196 vs 203 days, P=ns). Statistically, the third tumor appeared slightly faster in the red-tattooed group than in the controls (214 vs 224 days, P=.043). For the second and third tumor, the growth rate was faster in the red-tattooed group compared with the control (31 vs 49 days, P=.009 and 30 vs 38 days, P=.036). In conclusion, no spontaneous cancers were observed in skin tattooed with a red ink containing 2-anisidine. However, red tattoos exposed to UVR showed faster tumor onset regarding the third tumor, and faster growth rate of the second and third tumor indicating red ink acts as a cocarcinogen with UVR. The cocarcinogenic effect was weak and may not be clinically relevant., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) with methyl-aminolevulinate (MAL) is a well-established treatment for precancerous skin lesions and non-melanoma skin cancer. Treatment outcomes are less effective for thick than for superficial lesions, which are presumed to be due to insufficient PpIX biodistribution in tumour tissue. Hexyl-aminolevulinate (HAL) is a more lipophilic photosensitizer precursor than MAL and may penetrate the skin to a greater depth and more homogeneously. We compared HAL- and MAL-induced PpIX accumulation in specific skin compartments using concentrations of 2%, 6% and 20% HAL and MAL on long-term UV-irradiated mouse skin. Furthermore, 20% HAL and 20% MAL were applied to non-irradiated skin. Porphyrin fluorescence was measured by fluorescence microscopy in selected skin regions: the epidermis, superficial dermis, deep dermis and sebaceous gland epithelium down to a depth of 1 mm. We found higher PpIX fluorescence intensities in epidermis and sebaceous gland epithelium from 2%, 6% and 20% HAL (median 72-104 au) than in corresponding concentrations of MAL (median 35-69 au) (P < 0.01). Fluorescence intensities in the superficial (35 au) and deep dermis (32 au) were similar for HAL and MAL (P = 0.51) and lower than epidermal fluorescence intensities (P < 0.001). Significantly, higher median PpIX fluorescence intensities (64 au) were found in 20% MAL-incubated skin irradiated with UV than in non-irradiated skin (48 au) (P < 0.001). HAL-induced fluorescence intensities did not depend on UV exposure (HAL 20%, UV: 72 au, non-UV: 70 au) (P = 0.87). In conclusion, HAL express high affinity for epidermis and sebaceous gland epithelium, and MAL for actinically damaged skin, which raises future perspectives for improved selectivity in PDT., (© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Recently, 3% diclofenacnatrium gel (diclofenac) was introduced for the treatment of actinic keratoses. Data on photocarcinogenesis of topical diclofenac are limited, and we wished to investigate whether topical diclofenac can accelerate photocarcinogenesis using simulated solar radiation (SSR). Diclofenac was applied topically on the backs of hairless, female, C3.Cg/TifBomTac immunocompetent mice three times weekly followed by ultraviolet radiation (2, 3, or 4 Standard Erythema Dose) until death. There was a significant difference in survival between diclofenac-treated groups and control groups (P<0.0001). Physical examination of the diclofenac-treated mice showed peptic ulcers, oesophageal ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding. To be sure that these side effects were not caused by topical absorption without oral ingestion, one group of mice was wearing Elizabethan collars and was single housed. Nevertheless, these mice also had gastrointestinal side effects. We terminated the experiment after 151 days when only a few mice remained in the diclofenac-treated groups and most had symptoms of discomfort and weight loss. No tumors developed as a result of the early termination., (© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Topical corticosteroids such as hydrocortisone-17-butyrate (HCB) and clobetasol-17-propionate (CP) and vitamin D(3) derivatives such as calcipotriol (CAL) are widely used to treat psoriasis. The immunosuppressive effects of corticosteroids make their topical use a concern for skin carcinogenicity. Few studies have assessed the effect of topical corticosteroids and topical vitamin D(3) derivatives on photocarcinogenesis induced by ultraviolet radiation. We investigated whether HCB, CP, or CAL can accelerate photocarcinogenesis using simulated solar radiation (SSR). HCB, CP, or CAL was applied topically to the backs of hairless, female, C3.Cg/TifBomTac-immunocompetent mice in 16 groups of 25 mice each. The drugs were applied three times weekly followed by 0, 2, 4, or 6 standard erythema doses (SED) of SSR for 365 days or until death. No change was observed in the time required for tumor development in mice treated with HCB and 2 SED (HCB-2SED) and HCB-6SED. However, the time required for tumor development increased with HCB-4SED treatment. Treatment with CP-2SED did not change the time to onset of the first and second tumor, but all other CP treatments in combination with SSR increased the time. CAL-2SED decreased the time to onset of the first tumor but not of the second and third tumor. CAL-4SED and CAL-6 SED did not change or increased the time to tumor development. Our data indicated that topical administration of HCB and CAL did not alter the photocarcinogenesis of SSR and that topical CP administration had a photoprotective effect. Thus, HCB, CP, and CAL do not increase photocarcinogenesis induced by SSR., (© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Background: Hexyl aminolevulinate (HAL) is a long-chained 5-aminolevulinic acid-ester that has been proposed as a novel photosensitizing agent to methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) in topical photodynamic therapy (PDT). The more lipophilic HAL, may improve treatment outcome for non-melanoma skin cancer., Objective: To compare the prophylactic and therapeutic effects of HAL- and MAL-PDT for ultraviolet-induced squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) in hairless mice., Methods: Mice (n = 249) were irradiated with solar UV-radiation (UVR) until SCC occurred. Before any skin changes developed, two prophylactic PDT treatments were given, using creams of HAL (2%, 6%, 20%) or MAL (20%) followed by illumination (632 nm, Aktilite, Photocure). Two therapeutic PDT-treatments were given by randomization to the first developed SCC of 1 mm. Primary end-points were time to first SCC of 1 mm and complete SCC clearance. Secondary end-points were time to SCC-recurrence, PpIX fluorescence and skin reactions to PDT., Results: The median time to first SCC was significantly longer for mice treated with prophylactic HAL-PDT (2%, 6% and 20% HAL, 264 days) and MAL-PDT (20% MAL, 269 days) than mice exposed to UVR (186 days) and UVR + placebo-PDT (199 days) (P < 0.0001). The therapeutic efficacy of HAL- and MAL-PDT showed cure rates of 23-61.5% (P = 0.11). Similar PpIX fluorescence intensity and severity of clinical reactions were seen for HAL- and MAL-groups, although mice developed more intense hyper-pigmentation when treated with 20% MAL-PDT compared with 2% HAL-PDT., Conclusions: PDT with HAL (2%, 6% and 20%) and MAL (20%) is equally effective to prevent and treat UV-induced SCC in hairless mice.

Topical benzoyl peroxide (BPO) gel has long been used to treat acne vulgaris and has recently been combined with clindamycin (BPO-clin). No skin malignancies have been reported after clinical use of BPO, but there has been concern about the possible carcinogenicity of BPO alone and in combination with UV radiation. BPO can promote skin tumorigenesis in a mouse skin chemical carcinogenesis model. As acne vulgaris is frequently localized on sun-exposed areas, we investigated whether BPO or BPO-clin accelerates photocarcinogenesis in combination with simulated solar radiation (SSR) in 12 groups of 25 hairless female C3.Cg/TifBomTac-immunocompetent mice. BPO or BPO-clin was applied topically to the back five times each week, followed by SSR three times each week (2, 3, or 4 standard erythema doses) 3-4 h later, for 365 days or until death. Generally BPO and BPO-clin did not accelerate the time to first, second or third tumor. Therefore, there is no evidence suggesting that BPO or BPO-clin is photocarcinogenic. However, we found significantly higher mortality in the SSR exposed groups receiving BPO and BPO-clin compared with groups receiving only BPO or BPO-clin. Our results show that BPO and the combination of BPO and clindamycin do not accelerate photocarcinogenesis, but are toxic in hairless mice. Based on the current data, the cancer risk associated with the use of BPO and BPO-clin in sun-exposed areas is minimal. Thus, while the carcinogenic potential of BPO is not fully understood, at the present time, evidence suggests that this compound is safe to use.

Pimecrolimus and tacrolimus are topical calcineurin inhibitors developed specifically for the treatment of atopic eczema. Experience with long-term use of topical calcineurin inhibitors is limited and the risk of rare but serious adverse events remains a concern. We have previously demonstrated the absence of carcinogenic effect of tacrolimus alone and in combination with simulated solar radiation (SSR) on hairless mice. The aim of this study is to determine whether pimecrolimus accelerates photocarcinogenesis in combination with SSR or pimecrolimus and tacrolimus accelerate photocarcinogenesis in combination with UVA. We used 11 groups of 25 hairless female C3.Cg/TifBomTac immunocompetent mice (n = 275). Pimecrolimus cream or tacrolimus ointment was applied on their dorsal skin three times weekly followed by SSR (2, 4, or 6 standard erythema doses, SED) or UVA (25 J/cm(2)) 3-4 h later. This was done up to 365 days in the SSR-treated groups and up to 500 days in the UVA-treated groups. Pimecrolimus did not accelerate the time for development of the first, second or third tumor in any of the groups. Median time to the first tumor was 240 days for the control-2SED group compared with pimecrolimus-2SED group (233 days), control-4SED group (156 days) compared with pimecrolimus-4SED group (163 days) and control-6SED group (162 days) compared with pimecrolimus-6SED group (170 days). Only one mouse in each of the three UVA groups developed a tumor. We conclude that pimecrolimus in combination with SSR and both pimecrolimus and tacrolimus in combination with UVA do not accelerate photocarcinogenesis in hairless mice.

Numerous studies have demonstrated the utility of topical tacrolimus ointment in atopic dermatitis. However, there is a concern that local immunosuppression by calcineurin inhibitors may enhance dermal photocarcinogenesis and carcinogenesis. Therefore, we investigated the influence of topical tacrolimus ointment on squamous cell carcinoma formation in hairless female C3.Cg/TifBomTac immunocompetent mice exposed to solar simulated radiation (SSR). In a first experiment, mice (n = 200) had tacrolimus applied on their dorsal skin three times weekly followed by SSR (2, 4 or 6 standard erythema doses, SED) 3-4 h later. Tacrolimus did not reduce the time to tumor development and in the group receiving 4 SED it even had a protective effect (156 days vs 170 days, P = 0.008). In a second experiment, mice (n = 50) were irradiated with 6 SED three times weekly for 3 months and subsequently treated five times weekly with topical tacrolimus to mimic the use of tacrolimus on sun-damaged skin. The median time to the first skin tumor was 234 days in SSR + tacrolimus group compared with 227 days in the only SSR-irradiated group (P = 0.160). In a third experiment, mice (n = 25) had tacrolimus applied on their dorsal skin every day for 1 month, thereafter the group was irradiated with 4 SED three times weekly. The median time to the first skin tumor was 142 days in tacrolimus + SSR group compared with 156 days in the only SSR-irradiated group from experiment 1 (P = 0.363). We conclude that tacrolimus ointment does not accelerate photocarcinogenesis or induce any dermal carcinogenicity in hairless mice.

Short-wave ultraviolet radiation (UVB) is the most carcinogenic part of the ultraviolet spectrum. The target cells of skin cancer are believed to be the bulge stem cells and/or their offspring, the transit-amplifying cells that reside in the epidermis. However, the amount of UVB penetrating epidermis and reaching the bulge cells is very low, which questions if these cells suffer sufficient DNA damage to transform into cancer stem cells. We performed this study to determine whether UV-induced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) originates from the epidermis or the hair follicles in mice. Hairless mice had their epidermis removed at different levels using CO(2) laser ablation. Simulated solar irradiations were administered either preoperatively (in total 7 weeks) or pre- and postoperatively (in total 30 weeks). Control groups were untreated or treated only with solar-simulated radiation or with laser. Blinded clinical assessments of skin tumors were carried out weekly during 12 months observation. Only mice irradiated with solar-simulated radiation both pre- and postoperatively developed tumors. Median time to first, second and third tumor ranged from 19 to 20.5 weeks and was not significantly different between the non-laser and laser-treated groups (P > 0.05). The tumor response was thus similar in UV-exposed mice whether they had their epidermis removed or not. No tumors appeared in control groups. Hence, UV-induced SCC of mice originates from cells of the hair follicle, presumably the bulge stem cells, indicating that ultraviolet radiation penetrates epidermis sufficiently to cause irreversible DNA damage in cells located beneath the epidermis.