Objective: To assess individual time-related (timestamped) UV radiation (UVR) dose pattern and sun exposure behavior.

Daylight-mediated MAL-PDT is an effective, convenient and nearly pain-free treatment for patients with multiple thin AKs. Daylight-mediated PDT procedures were easily performed and 2 h of daylight exposure resulted in uniformly high response rates when conducted in the period from June to October in Nordic countries.

Daylight-mediated PDT of moderate to thick AKs was less effective than daylight-mediated PDT of thin AKs especially in some centres. However, nearly all thicker lesions (grades II and III) were reduced to a lower lesion grade at 3 months after a single treatment of daylight-mediated PDT.

Where and when to perform daylight-PDT depends on the PpIX light dose and outdoor temperature. The PpIX light dose was influenced by the geographical location (latitude), weather condition and time of year. The UV index was not more suitable than temperature and weather to predict if the intensity of daylight would be sufficient for daylight-PDT.

Ultraviolet (UV) reduction campaigns since 1986 were based on the estimation that individuals get 80% of their cumulative lifetime UV dose by the age of 18. To investigate if this estimation is true, we compared annual UV doses received during life in 164 Danish volunteers: children, teenagers, indoor workers, and golfers (age range 4-67 y) who recorded sun exposure behavior in diaries and carried personal UV dosimeters, measuring time-stamped UV doses. The annual UV dose did not significantly correlate with age but the variation in annual UV dose was high (median 166 SED (standard erythema dose), 95% range: 37-551 SED). The annual UV dose did correlate with days with risk behavior (sunbathing/exposing upper body) (r=0.51, p<0.001) and in adults also with hours performing outdoor sports (r=0.39, p<0.001), gardening, and sun-bed sessions (r=0.26, p=0.02). Teenagers had significantly more days with risk behavior than adults (21 vs 13 d, p=0.006) but not than children (15 d). No differences in UV dose among the age groups were found on workdays. Only 25% of the lifetime UV dose was received before the age of 20 and the annual UV dose was thus independent of age. Reduction of cumulative lifetime UV dose could be obtained by minimizing risk behavior.

Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy (daylight PDT) is a simple and pain free treatment of actinic keratoses. Weather conditions may not always allow daylight PDT outdoors. We compared the spectrum of five different lamp candidates for indoor “daylight PDT” and investigated their ability to photobleach protoporphyrin IX (PpIX). Furthermore, we measured the amount of PpIX activating daylight available in a glass greenhouse, which can be an alternative when it is uncomfortable for patients to be outdoors. The lamps investigated were: halogen lamps (overhead and slide projector), white light-emitting diode (LED) lamp, red LED panel and lamps used for conventional PDT. Four of the five light sources were able to photobleach PpIX completely. For halogen light and the red LED lamp, 5000 lux could photobleach PpIX whereas 12,000 lux were needed for the white LED lamp. Furthermore, the greenhouse was suitable for daylight PDT since the effect of solar light is lowered only by 25%. In conclusion, we found four of the five light sources and the greenhouse usable for indoor daylight PDT. The greenhouse is beneficial when the weather outside is rainy or windy. Only insignificant ultraviolet B radiation (UVB) radiation passes through the greenhouse glass, so sun protection is not needed.

Skin cancer is caused by solar UVR, which is also essential for vitamin D production. DNA damage (thymine dimers: T-T dimers) and vitamin D (25(OH)D) synthesis are both initiated by solar UVB. We aimed to investigate the simultaneous adverse and beneficial effects of solar UVB exposure in holidaymakers. Sun-seekers and skiers (n=71) were observed over 6 days through on-site monitoring, personal diary entries, and recording of personal UVB exposure doses with electronic dosimeters. Urine and blood samples were analyzed for T-T dimers and 25(OH)D, respectively. The volunteers had a statistically significant increase in vitamin D. There were strong associations between UVB exposure and post-holiday levels of T-T dimers and vitamin D, as well as between post-holiday T-T dimers and vitamin D. We conclude that UVB-induced vitamin D synthesis is associated with considerable DNA damage in the skin. These data, on two major health predictors, provide a basis for further field studies that may result in better understanding of the risks and benefits of "real life" solar exposure. However, vitamin D status can be improved more safely through the use of vitamin D dietary supplements.

Personal ultraviolet radiation (UVR) dosimetry is important because sunlight is the most important risk factor for skin cancer and a risk factor for some eye diseases and immunosuppression and related disorders. Integrating devices, such as polysulphone film dosimeters, are generally used. To measure the exact dose at specific times, we have developed a personal electronic UVR dosimeter that makes time-stamped measurements. It has a sensor with an erythema action spectrum response and a linear sensitivity (dose-response) with no offset. The sensor has cosine response, and the dosimeter can cope with environmental conditions such as rain, temperature and dirt. It can be programmed to measure with different time intervals and save the average of a specified number of measurements in the memory that can store 32 000 time-stamped measurements. It is small (36 x 28 x 13 mm), weighs 14 g and can work for 4 months without maintenance. It is worn on the wrist, is equipped with a watch showing the time and may thus be used in large-scale studies. The sensitivity can change by 10% due to temperature changes from -5 to 40 degrees C. The UVR dosimeter sensitivity is 0.09 standard erythema doses (SED)/h and the difference in total received dose during 7 days between a Solar Light 501 UV-Biometer (186 SED) and our UVR dosimeter was 3% and the median difference in daily total dose was 2.2%. The dosimeter provides unique possibilities. Examples of personal UVR measurements, data calculations and how they can be interpreted are given.