Daylight photodynamic therapy (dPDT) uses sunlight as a light source to treat superficial skin cancer. Using sunlight as a therapeutic device has been present for centuries, forming the basis of photodynamic therapy in the 20th century. Compared to conventional PDT, dPDT can be a less painful, more convenient and an effective alternative. The first clinical uses of dPDT on skin cancers began in Copenhagen in 2008. Currently, aminolevulinic acid-mediated dPDT has been approved to treat actinic keratosis patients in Europe. In this review article, we introduce the history and mechanism of dPDT and focus on the pros and cons of dPDT in treating superficial skin cancers. The future applications of dPDT on other skin diseases are expected to expand as conventional PDT evolves.

Fungal keratitis is a serious clinical infection on the cornea caused by fungi and is one of the leading causes of blindness in Asian countries. The treatment options are currently limited to a few antifungal agents. With the increasing incidence of drug-resistant infections, many patients fail to respond to antibiotics. Riboflavin-mediated corneal crosslinking (similar to photodynamic therapy (PDT)) for corneal ectasia was approved in the US in the early 2000s. Current evidence suggests that PDT could have the potential to inhibit fungal biofilm formation and overcome drug resistance by using riboflavin and rose bengal as photosensitizers. However, only a few clinical trials have been initiated in anti-fungal keratitis PDT treatment. Moreover, the removal of the corneal epithelium and repeated application of riboflavin and rose bengal are required to improve drug penetration before and during PDT. Thus, an improvement in trans-corneal drug delivery is mandatory for a successful and efficient treatment. In this article, we review the studies published to date using PDT against fungal keratitis and aim to enhance the understanding and awareness of this research area. The potential of modifying photosensitizers using nanotechnology to improve the efficacy of PDT on fungal keratitis is also briefly reviewed.

Background: Real-world clinical data on psoriasis patients receiving different biological agents is needed, especially in Asian populations. Objectives: Our aim is to compare and analyze the efficacy and safety profile of four biological agents (etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab and secukinumab) in a real-world setting in Taiwan. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of all patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≥ 10) who received etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab or secukinumab between January 2011 and December 2018 in a tertiary hospital in Taiwan. Results: A total of 119 treatment episodes in 75 patients were included in this study. Ustekinumab was used in 49 treatment episodes, followed by secukinumab in 46 treatment episodes, adalimumab in 14 treatment episodes and etanercept in 10 treatment episodes. The proportion of the biologic-naïve was highest in etanercept (100%) and lowest in secukinumab (23.9%). The PASI-75, -90 and -100 were the highest in secukinumab (91.3%, 82.6%, 41.3%, respectively), followed by ustekinumab (79.6%, 44.9%, 16.3%), adalimumab (64.3%, 28.6%, 7.1%) and etanercept (50.0%, 30.0%, 0%). The rate of adverse events that required treatment was highest for secukinumab (15.2%), followed by adalimumab (14.3%), ustekinumab (8.2%), and etanercept (0%), including 4 cases of infections, 2 cases of cardiovascular diseases and 4 cases of cancers. Conclusions: This real world data showed differential efficacy and safety of the four biological agents.