Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 355

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Photodynamic Therapy Using Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate vs Surgeryfor Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Prospective Trial

Rhodes, Lesley E., de Rie, Menno, Enström, Ylva, Groves, Richard, Morken, Tore, Goulden, Victoria, Wong, Gavin A. E., Grob, Jean-Jacques, Varma, Sandeep, Wolf, Peter·2004·Archives of Dermatology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is increasingly used as a noninvasive treatment for nodular basal cell carcinoma (BCC), without a sound evidence base. OBJECTIVE: To compare topical PDT, with the use of the sensitizer methyl aminolevulinate, and standard excision surgery in nodular BCC. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study. SETTING: University dermatology departments. PATIENTS: A total of 101 adults with previously untreated nodular BCC. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received methyl aminolevulinate PDT (n = 52) or surgery (n = 49). The PDT was given twice, 7 days apart, with methyl aminolevulinate cream (160 mg/g) and 75 J/cm(2) red light (570-670 nm). Thirteen patients with a noncomplete response to PDT at 3 months (24% lesions) were retreated. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary end point was clinically assessed lesion clearance at 3 months after treatment. Secondary end points were sustained response rate at 12 months and cosmetic outcome at 3 and 12 months. Cosmesis and lesion recurrence were further assessed at 24 months. RESULTS: Data from 97 patients (105 lesions) were included in the 3-month per-protocol analysis. Complete response rates did not differ significantly between groups (51/52 [98%] lesions with surgery vs 48/53 [91%] lesions with methyl aminolevulinate PDT; difference [95% confidence interval], 4.8% (-3.4% to 13.0%]; P =.25). At 12 months, tumor-free rates were 50 (96%) of 52 lesions with surgery vs 44 (83%) of 53 with methyl aminolevulinate PDT (P =.15). More patients treated with methyl aminolevulinate PDT than surgery had an excellent or good cosmetic outcome at all time points (significant at 12 and 24 months on patient assessment, P<.05, and at 3, 12, and 24 months on investigator evaluation, P<.001). At 24 months, 5 lesions that had initially cleared with methyl aminolevulinate PDT had recurred, compared with 1 after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Methyl aminolevulinate PDT is an effective treatment for nodular BCC, and while there is a trend for higher recurrence with this modality, it conveys the advantage over surgery of better cosmesis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archderm.140.1.17

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

See all 355

Metadata

Authors
Rhodes, L. E., de Rie, M., Enström, Y., Groves, R., Morken, T., Goulden, V., Wong, G. A. E., Grob, J.-J., Varma, S., & Wolf, P.
Venue
Archives of Dermatology
Published
2004-01-01
Volume
140
Issue
1
Pages
17-23
ISSN
0003-987X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2130465532
Cited by
355
References
24
FWCI
20.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Photodynamic Therapy Using Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate vs Surgeryfor Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Prospective Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archderm.140.1.17
The paper
Rhodes, L. E., de Rie, M., Enström, Y., Groves, R., Morken, T., Goulden, V., Wong, G. A. E., Grob, J.-J., Varma, S., & Wolf, P. (2004). Photodynamic Therapy Using Topical Methyl Aminolevulinate vs Surgeryfor Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Prospective Trial. Archives of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.140.1.17

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.