Laser treatment found to reverse skin aging markers

#1

Laser treatment may reverse skin aging at the molecular level, new study finds

A new human study published in Nature’s Scientific Reports looked at Candela’s Nordlys non-ablative fractional laser and found it appears to reverse molecular changes associated with skin aging, offering what researchers describe as the first in vivo evidence that the treatment can remodel the skin’s epigenetic profile.

Study design: 22 adults underwent three treatments with Candela’s 1940 nm non-ablative fractional laser, using a split-face design — one cheek treated, the other left as a control.

Key findings:

  • Researchers tracked DNA methylation patterns — chemical tags on DNA that regulate gene behavior without changing the genetic code — which scientists use as a reliable marker of biological aging.
  • Across more than 3.8 million genome sites, the laser shifted DNA methylation in the opposite direction of normal aging at nearly 84% of the age-related sites that responded to treatment.
  • The molecular changes didn’t appear right after treatment — they emerged about a month later, kept strengthening over following months, and were still stable six months out, suggesting ongoing skin remodeling long after treatment ended.
  • Visible results matched the molecular ones: a median 38% reduction in brown spots one month after treatment, plus improvements in texture and pigmentation.
  • The affected genes were linked to collagen production, skin barrier function, and normal skin renewal — pointing to actual repair, not just a temporary cosmetic effect.

Interesting side finding: The study also found DNA methylation changes in genes tied to basal cell and squamous cell skin cancer biology — the two most common skin cancer types. While not designed to test cancer prevention, this aligns with earlier research linking this laser treatment to lower risk of facial keratinocyte carcinomas. Researchers are careful to note this doesn’t mean the laser prevents cancer — just that it opens a new research angle.

Caveats: The findings don’t mean aging can simply be erased with a laser, and larger studies are needed to confirm the results. Small sample size (22 people) and industry-linked authorship (Candela-sponsored, with a co-author from Mitra Bio, a skin-epigenetics diagnostics company) are worth keeping in mind.
Bottom line: This is one of the first studies suggesting a common cosmetic laser might do more than skin-deep — it may be nudging skin’s actual aging biology, not just its appearance. Promising, but early-stage.

2 Likes
#2

Lasering the Clock: Can a Skin Laser Rewind Your Epigenetic Age?

A 22-person split-face pilot study reports that three sessions of a 1940-nm non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) — a mainstream cosmetic resurfacing device — leave a durable mark on the DNA methylation of facial skin. No methylation changes appeared immediately, but 635 differentially methylated regions (DMRs) emerged one month after the final treatment, intensified at three months, and stabilized at six. Critically, at loci that showed strong signal in both a skin-aging reference dataset and the treated skin, roughly 84% moved in the direction opposite to aging — the laser tended to demethylate sites that gain methylation with age and vice versa. These molecular shifts tracked visible improvements in pigmentation and texture. The headline: a laser people already buy for wrinkles may be nudging the skin’s epigenome toward a younger-looking state, though this is a small, unblinded, biomarker-only pilot with no gene-expression validation.

For years, dermatologists have known that fractional lasers make skin look better — smoother texture, fewer brown spots, tighter tone. What nobody had shown, in living human skin, is that the benefit is written into the epigenome. This study is the first attempt to do exactly that.

The design is elegantly simple and its greatest strength. Each of 22 volunteers had one side of the face treated three times with a 1940-nm laser while the other side, untouched, served as a within-person control. That paired design cancels out most of the noise — genetics, sun habits, age, lifestyle — that plagues skin studies. Researchers then lifted epidermal cells painlessly with tape strips and read methylation at about 3.8 million CpG sites across five timepoints over six months.

The “big idea” is timing. Nothing happened right after treatment. The methylome only began to shift a month after the full course, kept shifting at three months, and settled into a new steady state by six months. This is not the fingerprint of acute wound-healing, which would show up in hours to days. It looks instead like a slow, programmed remodeling — the molecular equivalent of the skin rebuilding itself and then holding the new configuration.

Where did the changes land? On genes governing epidermal stem-cell maintenance (SOX9, KLF4, RUNX1), WNT developmental signaling (WNT7B, SFRP1), collagen and matrix remodeling (COL1A2, MMP2), and Polycomb-regulated developmental loci — the very regions known to drift with age. And the direction mattered: about 84% of the strongly-changing sites moved against the aging trajectory.

The catch, and it is a big one, is scale and rigor. Twenty-two people, no blinding, no sham laser, and by six months only ten volunteers remained. There is no RNA or protein data to prove these methylation marks actually change what cells do. And “rejuvenation” here is explicitly defined as partial molecular resemblance to younger skin — not reversal of biological age, and not a longevity claim. It is a provocative first data point, not a verdict.

Actionable Insights

The honest take-home is narrow: this is cosmetic, local, and preliminary. What it does offer is quantified cosmetic effect sizes for a real, FDA-context-registered device.

The strongest, cleanest signal is pigmentation. Brown spot counts on the treated side fell by a median of 38% at one month (p < 0.001) and 21% at three months. Because this is split-face, the treatment-attributable effect is the difference from the control side: the untreated side fell only 14%, so the laser-specific benefit is roughly a 24-percentage-point additional reduction in brown spots at one month. Texture improved 15% treated versus 8% control (a ~7-point treatment effect); general spots fell 9% on the treated side.

Two important caveats on magnitude. First, benefit peaked at one month and faded — nothing was statistically significant at six months (n = 10). Second, the untreated side also improved (likely seasonal/sun-avoidance), which is exactly why the split-face control matters: it strips out that confound.

Practically: if you are already considering 1940-nm fractional laser for pigmentation or texture, this adds mechanistic weight and a realistic effect size (~a third fewer brown spots, peaking around one month, attenuating thereafter). It is not evidence for laser as an anti-aging or longevity intervention. [Confidence: Medium for the cosmetic effect sizes; Low for any “rejuvenation” framing.]

Context / Source

#3

This appears to be a medical company study with few participants. Since I was unable to find the photo evidence noted in the article I suspect it’s little more than the standard hyperbole of a company promoting it’s product. In this case I suspect the company Candela manufactures laser devices for the medical industry. And, of course, what better way to sell to a medical office than to provide a study that ostensibly proves that your device works!

1 Like
#4

Absolutely. Extreme skepticism is warranted with any vendor-funded study.