Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41182568›Full record

ArticlePhotochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology2025

Changes in ultraviolet B radiation-induced DNA damage and erythema after oral nicotinamide and polypodium leucotomos in healthy volunteers: an intraindividual controlled trial.

A Faisal, P A Philipsen, C M Lerche, T Douki, F S W Laursen, J R Granborg, P Bjerring, M Haedersdal, S R Wiegell

Abstract readControlled Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

A FaisalDepartment of Dermatology, Aalborg University Hospital South, Moelleparkvej 4, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark. aheen@rn.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9999-5671
P A PhilipsenDepartment of Dermatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
C M LercheDepartment of Dermatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
T DoukiCEA, CNRS, Grenoble-INP, IRIG/SyMMES Grenoble, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
F S W LaursenDepartment of Dermatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
J R GranborgDepartment of Dermatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
P BjerringDepartment of Dermatology, Aalborg University Hospital South, Moelleparkvej 4, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.
M HaedersdalDepartment of Dermatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
S R WiegellDepartment of Dermatology, Aalborg University Hospital South, Moelleparkvej 4, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSkin cancer, primarily caused by ultraviolet radiation (UVR), is the most common malignancy worldwide. The increasing incidence emphasizes the need for new protective measures.

objectiveTo evaluate the photoprotective effects of oral nicotinamide (NAM) and polypodium leucotomos (PL) in healthy individuals.

methodsIn this intraindividual controlled trial, participants (skin phototype I-III) were treated orally with NAM (2000 mg daily) or PL (480 mg daily) for 30 days. Protective effects against narrowband UVB-induced erythema and DNA damage were assessed by measuring the minimal erythema dose (MED) and thymidine dimer (TT-dimers) levels in urine and skin before and after treatment.

resultsA total of 47 participants completed the study. PL treatment increased MED by 29% (p = 0.00018), while NAM did not affect MED (p = 0.533). Neither treatment significantly affected TT-dimer levels measured in skin biopsies or urine. LIMITATIONS: Non-randomized design and use of a narrow-band light source not covering the full solar UV spectrum.

conclusionPL reduced UVB-induced erythema but had no measurable effect on DNA damage. NAM did not provide protection against erythema or DNA damage. Further research should explore the discrepancy between these findings and chemopreventative effects on skin cancer, using a light source covering the full solar UV spectrum.

Indexed as

DNA DamageErythemaNiacinamidePolypodiumUltraviolet RaysAdministration, OralAdultFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiddle AgedSkinYoung AdultNiacinamideAntioxidantsClinical researchKeratinocyte cancerNicotinamidePhotoprotectionPolypodium leucotomosSystemic photoprotectionUltraviolet radiation B

Identifiers

PMID41182568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.