Is red light therapy (low-level laser therapy or LLLT) associated with an increased risk of developing skin cancer in adults?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: January 6, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Red Light Therapy Does Not Cause Skin Cancer

Red light therapy (low-level laser therapy/LLLT) does not cause skin cancer and is fundamentally different from ultraviolet radiation-based phototherapies that carry documented carcinogenic risks.

Key Distinction: Red Light vs. UV Radiation

The provided evidence exclusively addresses ultraviolet (UV) phototherapy (narrowband UVB, PUVA, and photodynamic therapy using blue/UV light), which are entirely different modalities from red light therapy 1. These UV-based treatments carry well-established skin cancer risks, but this evidence does not apply to red light therapy.

Direct Evidence on Red Light Safety

DNA Damage Studies

  • Red light does not induce DNA damage in human dermal fibroblasts, even at high fluences up to 1280 J/cm² 2
  • Red light does not generate cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPD) or 6-4 photoproducts (6-4PP)—the characteristic DNA lesions associated with UV-induced skin cancer 2
  • Unlike UV radiation, red light does not create DNA adducts associated with skin cancer and photoaging 3

Tumor Growth Studies

  • A controlled animal study using a standard UV-induced skin cancer model found that red light (670 nm) at 5 J/cm² twice daily showed no measurable effect on existing tumor growth over 37 consecutive days 4
  • This suggests red light therapy may be safe even when malignant lesions are present 4

Mechanism of Safety

  • Red light operates in the visible spectrum (typically 630-670 nm) and does not possess the photon energy required to directly damage DNA like UV radiation (280-400 nm) 5, 2
  • While red light generates reactive oxygen species (ROS) in fibroblasts, this does not translate to DNA damage or carcinogenic potential 2
  • Red light actually stimulates beneficial cellular processes including collagen and elastin production without inducing the p53 mutations characteristic of UV-induced skin cancers 6

Clinical Context

The confusion likely arises because:

  • UV phototherapy (narrowband UVB, PUVA) carries significant dose-dependent skin cancer risk, particularly squamous cell carcinoma, with patients receiving >200 PUVA treatments having 30 times the risk of developing nonmelanoma skin cancer 1
  • Photodynamic therapy (PDT) using blue or UV light with photosensitizers has theoretical carcinogenic concerns, though actual risk appears low with only rare case reports over 25+ years of use 1
  • Red light therapy is fundamentally different and does not share these carcinogenic mechanisms 2, 3

Common Pitfall to Avoid

Do not conflate red light therapy with UV-based phototherapies. The extensive literature on UV phototherapy carcinogenicity (which dominates dermatology guidelines) does not apply to red/near-infrared light therapy, which operates through entirely different biological mechanisms and wavelengths 2, 4.

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Research

Light-emitting diode-generated red light inhibits keloid fibroblast proliferation.

Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.], 2015

Research

Ultraviolet radiation and skin cancer.

International journal of dermatology, 2010

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.