Photodynamic therapy with topical aminolevulinic acid

Table 3 Strength of recommendation and the level of evidence of the different indications of photodynamic therapy[24,25]

Disease	Strength of recommendation	Quality of evidence
Actinic keratoses	A	I
Bowen’s disease	A	I
Invasive squamous cell carcinoma	D	II-iii
Superficial basal cell carcinoma	A	I
Nodular basal cell carcinoma	A	I
NMSC in organ transplant recipients	B	I
Prevention of NMSC in organ transplant recipients	B	I
Field cancerization	B	I
Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma	C	II-iii
Extra-mammary Paget’s disease	D	III
Infectious and inflammatory dermatoses acne	A	I
Hand and foot warts	B	I
Genital warts	B	I
Cutaneous leishmaniasis	B	I
Photorejuvenation	B	I

Strength of recommendations: A: There is good evidence to support the use of the procedure; B:There is fair evidence to support the use of the procedure; There is poor evidence to support the use of the procedure; C: There is fair evidence to support the rejection of the use of the procedure; D: There is good evidence to support the rejection of the use of the procedure. Quality of evidence: I: Evidence obtained from at least one properly designed, randomized control trial; II-i: Evidence obtained from well-designed control trials without randomization; II-ii: Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case control analytic studies preferably from more than one centre or research group; II-iii: Evidence obtained from multiple time series with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in uncontrolled experiments could also be regarded as this type of evidence; III: Opinions of respected authorities based on clinical experience, descriptive studies or reports of expert committees; IV: Evidence inadequate, owing to problems of methodology (e.g., sample size, or length of comprehensiveness of follow-up or conflicts in evidence).