Skip to main content

Continuous ultra‐low‐intensity artificial daylight is not as effective as red

Buy Article:

$43.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)


Daylight‐mediated photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a simple and tolerable treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer. It is of interest which light intensity is sufficient to prevent accumulation of protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) and effectively treat actinic keratoses (AKs). We compared the efficacy of PDT with light‐emitting diode (LED) to daylight‐mediated PDT with very low‐intensity artificial daylight (‘daylight’) in the treatment of multiple AKs in the face or scalp.

Twenty patients were treated with conventional methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) PDT in one area. Another area was, after half an hour of occlusive treatment with MAL, illuminated for 2.5 h with low‐intensity ‘daylight’ (0.5 mW/cm2–3.7 mW/cm2) that corresponds to midday outdoor intensity in the Scandinavian winter.

After 3 months, with a response rate of 52%, low‐dose artificial daylight was less effective than conventional LED‐PDT (63%) (P = 0.0017). The mean PpIX light dose during ‘daylight’ exposure was 2.23 J/cm2 and the lower the PpIX light intensity, the higher the accumulation of PpIX (P = 0.003).

Even very low‐intensity/dose artificial daylight‐mediated PDT of multiple AKs resulted in a response rate of more than 50%. However, to ensure efficacies equivalent to conventional LED‐PDT, the treatment should not be conducted on very overcast days.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: 01 December 2011

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more