Oral vs Intravenous 5-Aminolaevulinic Acid for Photodynamic Therapy
Author Information
Author(s): C.S. Loh, A.J. MacRobert, J. Bedwell, J. Regula, N. Krasner, S.G. Bown
Primary Institution: National Medical Laser Centre, University College London
Hypothesis
Can oral administration of 5-aminolaevulinic acid (ALA) achieve similar photosensitisation effects as intravenous administration?
Conclusion
Oral administration of ALA produces similar temporal fluorescence kinetics as intravenous administration, but requires a higher dose due to first-pass metabolism.
Supporting Evidence
- Oral administration of ALA is simpler, safer, and more acceptable to patients compared to intravenous administration.
- Fluorescence microscopy showed maximum accumulation of PpIX 4 to 6 hours after administration of ALA.
- Two patients showed greater PpIX accumulation in tumor than adjacent normal mucosa.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well a medicine called ALA works when taken by mouth compared to when it's given through a needle. It found that taking it by mouth can work well, but you need to take more of it.
Methodology
The study involved administering ALA to rats and measuring the fluorescence levels in various tissues, as well as a pilot clinical study with three patients.
Limitations
The study primarily involved animal models, and the results may not fully translate to human patients.
Participant Demographics
Three male patients aged 84, 79, and 89 with inoperable colorectal adenocarcinoma.
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website