Lightning Talk Skin Cancer 2024

Sunscreens with SPF ≥15 versus SPF<15 and skin cancer risk, a systematic review. (#8)

Lene Kristine Juvet 1 , Lill Tove Nilsen 2 , Marit B. Veierød 3
  1. Section for Research and Development, Norwegian radiation and nuclear safety authority, Oslo, Norge
  2. Environmental monitoring, radon and UV section, Norwegian radiation and nuclear safety authority, Oslo, Norge
  3. Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Background. Preventive measures to reduce the incidence of cutaneous melanoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and basal cell carcinoma (BCC) include sunscreen use. While many countries recommend sunscreen with a sun protection factor (SPF) 30+, WHO still recommends SPF 15+. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of the existing literature on sunscreen use and risk of melanoma, cSCC and BCC in humans, focusing on sun protection factor (SFP) ≥15 versus SPF<15.

Method. This review was recently registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Cohort studies, case-control studies, intervention studies and clinical trials in humans will be included. Systematic literature searches were performed in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Epistemonikos.  We first searched for systematic reviews, and screened those for eligible original studies. Then, we searched for original studies published after the last systematic review.

Results. Four systematic reviews were identified. The last was published in 2018, and seven studies in the reference lists were eligible for inclusion. In literature search from 2018 to February 13, 2024, we identified 2386 unique publications. Two authors independently assessed titles and abstracts, resulting in 37 studies for full text assessment. Risk of bias of the included studies will be assessed by two authors using a Newcastle Ottawa scale checklist or Cochrane risk of bias 2 for trials. This is ongoing work and results will be presented at the conference.