LED photoprevention: Reduced MED response following multiple LED exposures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: As photoprotection with traditional sunscreen presents some limitations, the use of non-traditional treatments to increase skin resistance to ultraviolet (UV) induced damage would prove particularly appealing. The purpose of this pilot study was to test the potential of non-thermal pulsed light-emitting diode (LED) treatments (660 nm) prior to UV exposure in the induction of a state of cellular resistance against UV-induced erythema. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirteen healthy subjects and two patients with polymorphous light eruption (PLE) were exposed to 5, 6, or 10 LED treatments (660 nm) on an EXPERIMENTAL anterior thigh region. Individual baseline minimal erythema doses (MED) were then determined. UV radiation was thereafter performed on the LED EXPERIMENTAL and CONTROL anterior thigh areas. Finally, 24 hours post-UV irradiation, LED pre-treated MED responses were compared to the non-treated sites. RESULTS: Reduction of erythema was considered significant when erythema was reduced by >50% on the LED-treated side as opposed to CONTROL side. A significant LED treatment reduction in UV-B induced erythema reaction was observed in at least one occasion in 85% of subjects, including patients suffering from PLE. Moreover, there was evidence of a dose-related pattern in results. Finally, a sun protection factor SPF-15-like effect and a reduction in post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation were observed on the LED pre-treated side. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that LED based therapy prior to UV exposure provided significant protection against UV-B induced erythema. The induction of cellular resistance to UV insults may possibly be explained by the induction of a state a natural resistance to the skin via specific cell signaling pathways and without the drawbacks and limitations of traditional sunscreens. These results represent an encouraging step towards expanding the potential applications of LED therapy and could be useful in the treatment of patients with anomalous reactions to sunlight.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".