François Lagacé

Dr. François Lagacé

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BRBrandon Liam Ramchatesingh
Brandon Liam Ramchatesingh
AVAmelia Martinez Villarreal
Amelia Martinez Villarreal
DADomenico Arcuri
Domenico Arcuri
FLFrançois Lagacé
François Lagacé
SSSamy Abu Setah
Samy Abu Setah
Ivan LitvinovIvan Litvinov
Ivan Litvinov
Retinoids are natural and synthetic vitamin A derivatives that are effective for the prevention and the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSC). NMSCs constitute a heterogenous group of non-melanocyte-derived skin cancers that impose substantial burdens on patients and healthcare systems. They include entities such as basal cell carcinoma and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (collectively called keratinocyte carcinomas), cutaneous lymphomas and Kaposi’s sarcoma among others. The retinoid signaling pathway plays influential roles in skin physiology and pathology. These compounds regulate diverse biological processes within the skin, including proliferation, differentiation, angiogenesis and immune regulation. Collectively, retinoids can suppress skin carcinogenesis. Both topical and systemic retinoids have been investigated in clinical trials as NMSC prophylactics and treatments. Desirable efficacy and tolerability in clinical trials have prompted health regulatory bodies to approve the use of retinoids for NMSC management. Acceptable off-label uses of these compounds as drugs for skin cancers are also described. This review is a comprehensive outline on the biochemistry of retinoids, their activities in the skin, their effects on cancer cells and their adoption in clinical practice.

4 July 2023 in Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
FLFrançois Lagacé
François Lagacé
KDKathleen D’aGuanno
Kathleen D’aGuanno
CPConnor Prosty
Connor Prosty
ALAlexandra Laverde-Saad
Alexandra Laverde-Saad
LCLeila Cattelan
Leila Cattelan
ENElena Netchiporouk
Elena Netchiporouk
Background: Sex and gender have increasingly been recognized as significant risk factors for many diseases, including dermatological conditions. Historically, sex and gender have often been grouped together as a single risk factor in the scientific literature. However, both may have a distinct impact on disease incidence, prevalence, clinical presentation, severity, therapeutic response, and associated psychological distress.Objectives and project description: The mechanisms that underlie differences in skin diseases between males, females, men, and women remain largely unknown. The specific objectives of this review paper are: To highlight the biological differences between males and females (sex), as well as the sociocultural differences between men and women (gender) and how they impact the integumentary system. To perform a literature review to identify important sex- and gender-related epidemiological and clinical differences for various skin conditions belonging to a range of disease categories and to discuss possible biological and sociocultural factors that could explain the observed differences. To discuss dermatological skin conditions and gender-affirming treatments within the transgender community, a population of individuals who have a gender identity which is different than the gender identity they were assigned at birth.Future impact: With the rising number of individuals that identify as non-binary or transgender within our increasingly diverse communities, it is imperative to recognize gender identity, gender, and sex as distinct entities. By doing so, clinicians will be able to better risk-stratify their patients and select treatments that are most aligned with their values. To our knowledge, very few studies have separated sex and gender as two distinct risk factors within the dermatology literature. Our article also has the potential to help guide future prevention strategies that are patient-tailored rather than using a universal approach.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DADomenico Arcuri
Domenico Arcuri
BRBrandon Liam Ramchatesingh
Brandon Liam Ramchatesingh
FLFrançois Lagacé
François Lagacé
LILisa Iannattone
Lisa Iannattone
ENElena Netchiporouk
Elena Netchiporouk
Ivan LitvinovIvan Litvinov
Ivan Litvinov
Actinic keratosis (AK) is among the most commonly diagnosed skin diseases with potentially life-threatening repercussions if left untreated. Usage of pharmacologic agents represents one of many therapeutic strategies that can be used to help manage these lesions. Ongoing research into these compounds continues to change our clinical understanding as to which agents most benefit particular patient populations. Indeed, factors such as past personal medical history, lesion location and tolerability of therapy only represent a few considerations that clinicians must account for when prescribing appropriate treatment. This review focuses on specific drugs used in either the prevention or treatment of AKs. Nicotinamide, acitretin and topical 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) continue to be used with fidelity in the chemoprevention of actinic keratosis, although some uncertainty persists in regard to which agents should be used in immunocompetent vs. immunodeficient/immunosuppressed patients. Topical 5-FU, including combination formulations with either calcipotriol or salicylic acid, as well as imiquimod, diclofenac and photodynamic light therapy are all accepted treatment strategies employed to target and eliminate AKs. Five percent of 5-FU is regarded as the most effective therapy in the condition, although the literature has conflictingly shown that lower concentrations of the drug might also be as effective. Topical diclofenac (3%) appears to be less efficacious than 5% 5-FU, 3.75–5% imiquimod and photodynamic light therapy despite its favorable side effect profile. Finally, traditional photodynamic light therapy, while painful, appears to be of higher efficacy in comparison to its more tolerable counterpart, daylight phototherapy.

23 June 2023 in Current Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SCSantina Conte
Santina Conte
AAAmmar Saed Aldien
Ammar Saed Aldien
SJSébastien Jetté
Sébastien Jetté
JLJonathan Lebeau
Jonathan Lebeau
SASauliha Alli
Sauliha Alli
Ivan LitvinovIvan Litvinov
Ivan Litvinov
Incidence rates of melanoma and keratinocyte skin cancers have been on the rise globally in recent decades. While there has been a select focus on personal sun protection awareness, to our knowledge, there is a paucity of legislation in place to help support citizens’ efforts to protect themselves from the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation (UVR). Given this, we conducted a comprehensive review of legislation and guidelines pertaining to a variety of sun protection-related topics in countries of the Group of Seven (G7), Australia and New Zealand. Australia was the only country to have banned tanning beds for individuals of all ages, while other select countries have instituted bans for minors. In workplace policy, there is very little recognition of the danger of occupational UVR exposure in outdoor workers, and thus very few protective measures are in place. With regard to sports and recreation, certain dermatological/professional associations have put forward recommendations, but no legislation was brought forward by government bodies outside of Australia and New Zealand. With regard to youth, while there are various guidelines and frameworks in place across several countries, adherence remains difficult in the absence of concrete legislation and standardization of procedures. Finally, only Australia and a few select jurisdictions in the United States have implemented sales tax exemptions for sunscreen products. In light of our findings, we have made several recommendations, which we anticipate will help reduce the rates of melanoma and keratinocyte cancers in years to come. However, minimizing UVR exposure is not without risk, and we, therefore, suggest the promotion of vitamin D supplementation in conjunction with sun protective practices to limit potential harm.

22 July 2020 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AVAmelia Martinez Villarreal
Amelia Martinez Villarreal
JGJennifer Gantchev
Jennifer Gantchev
FLFrançois Lagacé
François Lagacé
ABAugustin Barolet
Augustin Barolet
DSDenis Sasseville
Denis Sasseville
Ivan LitvinovIvan Litvinov
Ivan Litvinov
Hypopigmented mycosis fungoides (HMF) is a form of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL), a heterogeneous group of extranodal non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. HMF has a unique set of defining features that include light colored to achromic lesions, a predilection for darker skin phototypes, an early onset of disease, and predominance of CD8+ T-cells, among others. In the current review, we detail the known pathways of molecular pathogenesis for this lymphoma and posit that an active Th1/cytotoxic antitumor immune response in part explains why this variant is primarily seen in children/adolescents and young adults, who do not exhibit signs of immunosenescence. As a result of this potent cytotoxic response, HMF patients experience mostly favorable overall prognosis, while hypopigmentation may in fact represent a useful surrogate marker of cytotoxic immunity targeting the malignant cells. Understanding the molecular processes behind the specific features that define HMF may lead to improved diagnostic accuracy, personalized prognosis by risk stratification, and improved management of HMF. Moreover, improving our knowledge of HMF may aid our further understanding of other cutaneous lymphomas.

26 September 2023 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SASauliha Alli
Sauliha Alli
JLJonathan Lebeau
Jonathan Lebeau
AHAgustina Hasbani
Agustina Hasbani
FLFrançois Lagacé
François Lagacé
Ivan LitvinovIvan Litvinov
Ivan Litvinov
Sandra PelaezSandra Pelaez
Sandra Pelaez
Globally, cutaneous melanoma (CM) incidence is increasing, with sun exposure identified as a key modifiable risk factor. The Atlantic provinces of Canada display varied CM incidence rates: New Brunswick aligns with the national average, while Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island exceed it, and Newfoundland and Labrador fall below this benchmark. We investigated the relationship between sun exposure and CM in these provinces. Twenty-two focus groups encompassing 95 Atlantic Canada residents were conducted and transcribed. A thematic analysis was conducted in MAXQDA using the social–ecological model as a framework. Residents of high-CM incidence provinces demonstrated greater sun exposure awareness, consulting UV indices, and using sunscreen and sun-protective clothing. However, they received greater UV exposure due to warmer climates and outdoor work and cultural activities. Conversely, those in low-incidence provinces used sunscreen and sun-protective clothing less often, engaged in occupations and hobbies affording less sun exposure, and lived in cooler climates. Our data supports a possible “sunscreen paradox”, whereby increased sunscreen use is correlated with augmented sun exposure, leading to a deceptive sense of security. Public health initiatives in Atlantic Canada promoting sun safety must address this paradox while integrating community-specific behaviors and norms in order to develop tailored campaigns.