ArticleRadiation research2017
Germicidal Efficacy and Mammalian Skin Safety of 222-nm UV Light.
Article in Radiation research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 115 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
115 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 369 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Managing infectious aerosols to counter engineered pandemics: Current recommendations and future research.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Guideline
- Pooled it
- The efficacy of ultraviolet light-emitting technology against coronaviruses: a systematic review.The Journal of hospital infection · 2021Pooled it
- Ultraviolet Sensing-Guided Biomedical Systems: From Label-Free Imaging to Dosimetry and Therapy Feedback.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Evaluation of ultraviolet irradiation at 254 nm and 222 nm in inactivating human noroviruses on surfaces.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- Determinants of Microbial Resistance to Far-UVC 222 nm in Healthcare Pathogens: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Subchronic toxicity of 222 nm ultraviolet irradiation in rats for safe human translation and application guidelines.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Beyond the visible: metal-ion-doped inorganic UV phosphors for advanced photonics.Light, science & applications · 2026Review
- Comparative performance and environmental evaluation of 222 and 254 nm UV lamps for in-duct air disinfection in building systems.Journal of building physics · 2026Article
- A review on applications and safety of 222 nm far UVC light for surface and air disinfection.Biophysical reviews · 2026Review
- Antimicrobial Effect of Ultraviolet C (UV-C) Light Compared to Standard Povidone-Iodine Protocol for Preoperative Disinfection of the Periocular Area.Veterinary ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Glycol vapor pathogen disinfection: a defensive technology for emerging biothreats.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Microbial Aerosols in Livestock Farming Environment: A Threat That Cannot Be Ignored.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
- Label-free visualization and quantitative analysis of Far UV-C skin safety with dynamic optical coherence tomography with subcellular resolution.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
- Corneal safety assessment of germicidal far UV-C radiation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Far-ultraviolet light causes direct DNA damage in human lung cells and tissues.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Transient transfection using 222 nm far UV-C irradiation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Photolysis of the peptide bond at 193 and 222 nm.The Journal of chemical physics · 2025Article
- Development of a UVC application machine for managing plant diseases in soilless greenhouse crop production.Scientific reports · 2025Article
55 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We have previously shown that 207-nm ultraviolet (UV) light has similar antimicrobial properties as typical germicidal UV light (254 nm), but without inducing mammalian skin damage. The biophysical rationale is based on the limited penetration distance of 207-nm light in biological samples (e.g. stratum corneum) compared with that of 254-nm light. Here we extended our previous studies to 222-nm light and tested the hypothesis that there exists a narrow wavelength window in the far-UVC region, from around 200-222 nm, which is significantly harmful to bacteria, but without damaging cells in tissues. We used a krypton-chlorine (Kr-Cl) excimer lamp that produces 222-nm UV light with a bandpass filter to remove the lower- and higher-wavelength components. Relative to respective controls, we measured: 1. in vitro killing of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) as a function of UV fluence; 2. yields of the main UV-associated premutagenic DNA lesions (cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers and 6-4 photoproducts) in a 3D human skin tissue model in vitro; 3. eight cellular and molecular skin damage endpoints in exposed hairless mice in vivo. Comparisons were made with results from a conventional 254-nm UV germicidal lamp used as positive control. We found that 222-nm light kills MRSA efficiently but, unlike conventional germicidal UV lamps (254 nm), it produces almost no premutagenic UV-associated DNA lesions in a 3D human skin model and it is not cytotoxic to exposed mammalian skin. As predicted by biophysical considerations and in agreement with our previous findings, far-UVC light in the range of 200-222 nm kills bacteria efficiently regardless of their drug-resistant proficiency, but without the skin damaging effects associated with conventional germicidal UV exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.