可见光 LED 治疗皮肤病的研究和报告方法问题

David Robert Grimes
{"title":"可见光 LED 治疗皮肤病的研究和报告方法问题","authors":"David Robert Grimes","doi":"10.1101/2024.09.12.24313560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The advent of mass-market Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) has seen considerable interest in potential dermatological applications of LED light photobiomodulation (PBM) for a range of conditions, with a thriving market for direct-to-consumer LED treatments, including red light, blue light, and yellow light wavelengths. Evidence of efficacy for many conditions is however decidedly mixed, with starkly different outcomes reported by different authors. Due to the wide range of irradiances and wavelengths used, interpretation, comparison, and even efficacy evaluation is often impossible or prohibitive, impeding evidence synthesis. This work establishes a framework for objectively cross-comparing patient dose in terms of fluence, and a model for contrasting received dose to typical solar dose at ground level to facilitate interpretation of results and evidence synthesis. This allowes direct cross-comparison of patient skin fluence from LED PMB treatments under different regimes, and a means for evidence synthesis. This was applied to LED PMB data from 27 clinical trials to examine fluences and patient-equivalent solar exposure from LED light-sources for dermatological conditions, including acne vulgaris, wrinkle-reduction, wound-healing, psoriasis severity, and erythemal index. The results of this analysis suggest that fluences, wavelengths, and solar exposure equivalent differed by orders of magnitude in he studies analysed, with effective doses often comparable to typical daily solar exposure. Better dose quantification and plausible biological justification for various wavelengths and fluences are imperative if LED therapy studies for dermatology are to be informative and research replicability improved.","PeriodicalId":501385,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Dermatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological issues in visible LED therapy dermatological research and reporting\",\"authors\":\"David Robert Grimes\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.09.12.24313560\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The advent of mass-market Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) has seen considerable interest in potential dermatological applications of LED light photobiomodulation (PBM) for a range of conditions, with a thriving market for direct-to-consumer LED treatments, including red light, blue light, and yellow light wavelengths. Evidence of efficacy for many conditions is however decidedly mixed, with starkly different outcomes reported by different authors. Due to the wide range of irradiances and wavelengths used, interpretation, comparison, and even efficacy evaluation is often impossible or prohibitive, impeding evidence synthesis. This work establishes a framework for objectively cross-comparing patient dose in terms of fluence, and a model for contrasting received dose to typical solar dose at ground level to facilitate interpretation of results and evidence synthesis. This allowes direct cross-comparison of patient skin fluence from LED PMB treatments under different regimes, and a means for evidence synthesis. This was applied to LED PMB data from 27 clinical trials to examine fluences and patient-equivalent solar exposure from LED light-sources for dermatological conditions, including acne vulgaris, wrinkle-reduction, wound-healing, psoriasis severity, and erythemal index. The results of this analysis suggest that fluences, wavelengths, and solar exposure equivalent differed by orders of magnitude in he studies analysed, with effective doses often comparable to typical daily solar exposure. Better dose quantification and plausible biological justification for various wavelengths and fluences are imperative if LED therapy studies for dermatology are to be informative and research replicability improved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Dermatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.12.24313560\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.12.24313560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着发光二极管(LED)进入大众市场,人们对 LED 光生物调节(PBM)在皮肤病领域的潜在应用产生了浓厚的兴趣,包括红光、蓝光和黄光波长在内的直接面向消费者的 LED 治疗市场蓬勃发展。然而,许多病症的疗效证据明显参差不齐,不同作者报告的结果也截然不同。由于所使用的辐照度和波长范围很广,解释、比较甚至疗效评估通常都是不可能的或令人望而却步的,从而阻碍了证据的综合。这项工作建立了一个以通量为单位对患者剂量进行客观交叉比较的框架,以及一个将接收到的剂量与地面典型太阳剂量进行对比的模型,以方便对结果进行解释和证据综合。这样就可以直接交叉比较不同制度下 LED PMB 治疗产生的患者皮肤通量,并提供证据综合的方法。我们将这一方法应用于 27 项临床试验的 LED PMB 数据,以检查 LED 光源治疗皮肤病(包括寻常痤疮、除皱、伤口愈合、牛皮癣严重程度和红斑指数)的通量和患者等效太阳照射。这项分析的结果表明,在所分析的研究中,流度、波长和太阳照射当量相差几个数量级,有效剂量通常与典型的日常太阳照射相当。如果要使皮肤病学的 LED 治疗研究具有参考价值并提高研究的可复制性,就必须对各种波长和荧光进行更好的剂量量化和合理的生物学论证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Methodological issues in visible LED therapy dermatological research and reporting
The advent of mass-market Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) has seen considerable interest in potential dermatological applications of LED light photobiomodulation (PBM) for a range of conditions, with a thriving market for direct-to-consumer LED treatments, including red light, blue light, and yellow light wavelengths. Evidence of efficacy for many conditions is however decidedly mixed, with starkly different outcomes reported by different authors. Due to the wide range of irradiances and wavelengths used, interpretation, comparison, and even efficacy evaluation is often impossible or prohibitive, impeding evidence synthesis. This work establishes a framework for objectively cross-comparing patient dose in terms of fluence, and a model for contrasting received dose to typical solar dose at ground level to facilitate interpretation of results and evidence synthesis. This allowes direct cross-comparison of patient skin fluence from LED PMB treatments under different regimes, and a means for evidence synthesis. This was applied to LED PMB data from 27 clinical trials to examine fluences and patient-equivalent solar exposure from LED light-sources for dermatological conditions, including acne vulgaris, wrinkle-reduction, wound-healing, psoriasis severity, and erythemal index. The results of this analysis suggest that fluences, wavelengths, and solar exposure equivalent differed by orders of magnitude in he studies analysed, with effective doses often comparable to typical daily solar exposure. Better dose quantification and plausible biological justification for various wavelengths and fluences are imperative if LED therapy studies for dermatology are to be informative and research replicability improved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Two-step Bayesian Mendelian Randomization Study on Cholecystitis and Dermatitis Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events following Nicotinamide Exposure: Cohort Study Methodological issues in visible LED therapy dermatological research and reporting Leveraging Machine Learning & Mobile Application Technology for Vitiligo Management: A Proof-of-Concept Nationwide melanoma registry databases in real-world settings: a scoping review protocol
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1