ReviewThe Australasian journal of dermatology2021
A review of actinic keratosis, skin field cancerisation and the efficacy of topical therapies.
Review in The Australasian journal of dermatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Histopathological Assessment of the Field of Cancerization in Human Skin Before and After Treatment With a 1927-nm Thulium Fractional Laser.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Observational
- Efficacy of 4% 5-Fluorouracil Cream in the Treatment of Actinic Keratoses: A Single-Center Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics and local recurrence risk in patients with multiple actinic keratoses: a retrospective clinical data analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Real-World Efficacy of Tirbanibulin in Actinic Keratosis Treatment: Expert Consensus and Clinical Insights.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2025Review
- Clinical and Dermoscopic Diagnosis of Actinic Keratosis.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2024Review
- Understanding Active Photoprotection: DNA-Repair Enzymes and Antioxidants.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Review
- Advancements in elucidating the pathogenesis of actinic keratosis: present state and future prospects.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Imiquimod as Local Immunotherapy in the Management of Premalignant Cutaneous Conditions and Skin Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Method of Assessing Skin Cancerization and KeratosesClinical and experimental dermatology · 2022Article
- Non-Invasive Analysis of Actinic Keratosis before and after Topical Treatment Using a Cold Stimulation and Near-Infrared Spectroscopy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
- Radiotherapy, Utilizing Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, for Extensive Skin Field Cancerization: A Retrospective Case Series Assessing Efficacy, Safety, and Cosmetic Outcomes at 12 Months After Treatment.Case reports in dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While a wide range of treatments exist for actinic keratosis and skin field cancerisation, the long-term benefits of the most common topical therapies are poorly defined. This report reviews the efficacy of the most commonly used topical therapies to treat regional or field lesions. Limited clinical and histopathological data are available on clearance rates at 12 months post-treatment for the most commonly used agents, with varied outcome measures making any comparison difficult. In general, total field clearance rates at 12 months are suboptimal for the most commonly employed agents. Given the increasing incidence of actinic keratosis and skin field cancerisation due to an ageing population, further research into the efficacy of therapies is critical to guide treatment choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.