ABSTRACT
The concept of aging has evolved from being primarily attributed to genetic factors to recognizing the critical role of epigenetic mechanisms. Recent advancements, such as epigenetic clocks, have provided tools to assess biological age and offer insights into aging processes at the molecular level. In aesthetic dermatology, understanding these processes allows for more personalized, effective interventions targeting the root causes of skin aging. This review explores the interplay of epigenetic changes, aging, and the potential of personalized care to enhance longevity and skin rejuvenation. This review is based on an extensive literature search conducted across PubMed and other scientific databases. Studies focused on epigenetic mechanisms such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, and their relationship to skin aging. Particular attention was given to recent advancements in biological clocks, including Horvath's Clock and GrimAge, and their implications for personalized dermatological treatments. Epigenetic clocks, such as Horvath's Clock, have demonstrated utility in assessing biological age through methylation markers, revealing actionable insights into aging processes. Energy‐based devices like fractional lasers and radiofrequency have shown promise in reversing age‐related epigenetic changes, promoting collagen synthesis, and reducing biological skin age. Additionally, lifestyle factors such as diet, sleep, and circadian rhythm alignment significantly influence epigenetic aging and skin health. Integrating epigenetic insights into aesthetic dermatology represents a paradigm shift in skin rejuvenation, allowing for personalized treatments that address visible signs of aging and underlying molecular mechanisms. Using biological clocks provides a framework for tailoring interventions to individual patient needs, optimizing outcomes, and extending the longevity of aesthetic results. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies, accessibility, and ethical considerations to fully harness the potential of epigenetics in promoting skin health and overall well‐being.
Keywords: biological aging, clinical dermatology, cosmetic dermatology, education, epigenetic clocks, longevity, personalized aesthetic treatments, skin rejuvenation
Unlocking longevity in aesthetic dermatology: epigenetics, aging, and personalized care.

1. Introduction
For decades, the prevailing belief was that our genetic code primarily dictated aging. The assumption that genes were the primary determinant of how we age, including the visible signs of aging, shaped much of the approach within aesthetic dermatology [1]. However, recent scientific advancements have illuminated that while genetics play a significant role, the aging process is heavily influenced by epigenetic factors, heritable changes in gene expression that do not alter the underlying DNA sequence [2]. This revelation has sparked a paradigm shift, particularly with the introduction of epigenetic clocks as biomarkers of biological aging [3]. These clocks provide a new perspective on how we understand, measure, and potentially influence physiological changes, especially in the skin. The “skin clock” concept positions the skin as the only visible reflection of internal health, acting as a mirror to the body's biological processes and organ functions. This idea moves beyond conventional antiaging approaches and embraces the notions of lifespan and health span, emphasizing that maintaining a healthy, vibrant appearance at any age is as important as reducing superficial signs of aging [4, 5]. This manuscript explores how biological clocks can enhance the precision, efficacy, and innovation of aesthetic interventions, providing a roadmap for integrating these tools into clinical practice.
2. The Role of DNA Methylation in Skin Aging
DNA methylation is a key epigenetic mechanism that regulates gene expression by adding methyl groups to DNA, typically at cytosine bases in CpG islands, which can silence or activate genes [6]. This process is essential for normal cellular function, development, and response to environmental factors. Abnormal methylation patterns are linked to diseases like cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, and autoimmune conditions, underscoring their importance in health maintenance [7]. The skin, the body's largest organ, is exposed to external factors contributing to intrinsic and extrinsic aging. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is a major driver of extrinsic aging, inducing free radical formation, DNA damage, and epigenetic changes such as hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes and hypomethylation of oncogenes, increasing skin cancer risk [8]. Twin studies have demonstrated the pivotal role of lifestyle and environmental factors in modulating these epigenetic mechanisms. For instance, research on identical twins with differing lifestyles highlights how smoking, poor nutrition, and sun exposure accelerate visible signs of skin aging and promote molecular changes, even among individuals with the same genetic background [9, 10, 11]. Moreover, lifestyle factors like poor nutrition, smoking, stress, and lack of sleep exacerbate this process by impairing skin repair, promoting inflammation, and increasing oxidative stress. These factors accelerate skin aging and elevate the risk of related diseases. However, while most studies emphasize the critical role of DNA methylation in aging and cancer risk, a limited number of conflicting reports highlight the complexity and evolving understanding of these mechanisms. This underscores the need for further research to refine our knowledge and applications in aesthetic dermatology [12, 13].
3. Epigenetic Clocks: A Novel Tool in Aging Research
The epigenetic clock is a revolutionary biomarker that measures biological age, offering insights into how cells age differently from predicted biological age and helping assess risks for age‐related diseases like cancer or cardiovascular conditions. The epigenetic clock has potential in personalized medicine, allowing for early interventions and evaluating lifestyle or therapeutic impacts on aging. As research progresses, it holds promise for advancing antiaging therapies and understanding the mechanisms behind aging.
Epigenetic clocks, such as Horvath's Clock and GrimAge, have emerged as highly accurate biomarkers for measuring biological age [14, 15]. These clocks use DNA methylation markers at specific genomic sites to estimate an individual's biological age, which often differs from their chronological age. Biological age is influenced not only by genetics but also by environmental factors. Horvath's Clock, one of the most widely used epigenetic clocks, measures methylation at the human genome's CpG (cytosine‐phosphate‐guanine) sites to assess biological age across various tissues, including skin [14]. GrimAge, an evolution of Horvath's Clock, incorporates additional predictors of mortality and healthspan, such as inflammation markers and smoking history, making it a robust tool for assessing disease risk and longevity. These clocks are particularly relevant in aesthetic dermatology because skin is one of the most environmentally exposed organs. The visible signs of skin aging, such as wrinkles, discoloration, and loss of elasticity, are not just cosmetic concerns but reflections of deeper molecular changes, including DNA damage and epigenetic alterations. In addition to epigenetic clocks, other advanced tools further our understanding of biological aging. PhenoAge incorporates clinical biomarkers to assess healthspan and mortality risk, while DunedinPoAm focuses on the rate of aging, providing dynamic insights into aging processes [16, 17, 18, 19]. Skin‐specific clocks, such as the Skin & Blood Clock, refine methylation analysis for dermatological applications [20]. Emerging technologies like proteomic and transcriptomic clocks further expand the landscape, offering a multi‐dimensional view of aging by integrating protein and RNA profiles [21]. These innovations highlight the potential for personalized approaches in aesthetic dermatology, enabling more precise and effective interventions that target the root causes of skin aging. By assessing biological age through these clocks, dermatologists would gain valuable insights into the aging process, tailoring treatments to an individual's unique aging profile and possibly even reversing age‐related epigenetic changes.
The graphical abstract illustrates the interplay between epigenetic aging and cosmetic dermatology. The schematic highlights the role of DNA methylation, histone modifications, and microbiome interactions in skin aging. The 12 hallmarks of aging provide a biological framework, while the integration of epigenetic clocks, AI‐driven predictive analytics, and medical devices exemplifies a personalized and holistic approach to aesthetic interventions.
4. The Skin Clock: Biological‐Driven Insights for Personalized Aging Diagnostics
Integrating the concept of a “skin clock” into diagnostics highlights an innovative approach to understanding skin health and aging comprehensively. The “skin clock” refers to the skin's biological age and functional capacity, assessed through advanced biomarkers and dynamic responses to environmental stimuli. This approach extends beyond superficial signs to capture deeper cellular processes influenced by epigenetic changes and other protein markers that reveal biological age. Incorporating such diagnostics aligns with the growing trend in dermatology to view skin aging through a multifaceted lens, where epigenetic, environmental, and functional assessments come together. This concept shifts the focus from traditional antiaging measures to a more integrative view emphasizing resilience, adaptability, and overall skin health [5, 22, 23, 24].
Recent research in biomarker diagnostics has further revolutionized how dermatologists assess and treat skin aging. The study by Foucher et al. demonstrated the potential of using protein markers from the stratum corneum to differentiate between clinical and chronological skin age, thus providing deeper insight into differential skin aging [25]. This biomarker‐based approach allows for a more precise evaluation of how environmental and lifestyle factors impact skin health at a molecular level. By incorporating such data, aesthetic treatments can be tailored not just to the patient's chronological age but to their actual biological skin profile [26].
Similarly, clinical measurement systems, as shown in the work by Maudet et al. with Skincam, provide a novel way to capture and monitor changes in skin features over time. This technology bridges the gap between objective diagnostic data and patient or dermatologist perceptions, offering a more holistic view of treatment effectiveness [27]. When paired with the power of AI‐based online analysis, as highlighted in studies by Flament et al. these diagnostic tools can be enhanced to offer real‐time tracking of changes and predictive modeling for future skin health [28].
Integrating such comprehensive biological analyses enables dermatologists to adopt a more individualized approach, adjusting interventions based on nuanced data rather than broad, age‐based guidelines [25]. This progression in diagnostic accuracy and predictive capacity underscores the potential to move beyond the traditional goal of simply mitigating visible signs of aging, instead supporting an overall strategy that preserves and enhances skin health and resilience over time. As aesthetic dermatology continues to evolve, the utilization of biomarkers will likely become a cornerstone of personalized treatment plans, aligning with the overarching aim of promoting longevity and well‐being in patients.
5. Targeting Epigenetic Changes With Aesthetic Interventions
Emerging research suggests that epigenetic markers of aging, such as DNA methylation patterns, can be modulated by aesthetic interventions [29]. This opens the possibility that treatments aimed at reducing the visible signs of aging influence the biological processes that contribute to aging at the molecular level, thereby influencing its biological age and longevity [30, 31, 32]. For instance, studies have demonstrated that energy‐based devices (EBDs), including fractional lasers, radiofrequency, and ultrasound therapy, stimulate collagen production and reverse age‐related methylation changes [33, 34, 35, 36]. Fractional laser resurfacing, a popular treatment for improving skin texture and reducing wrinkles, has been shown to stimulate collagen production and promote cellular repair. It was observed that fractional lasers could reduce the skin's biological age, as measured by epigenetic clocks, demonstrating that aesthetic treatments can influence deeper cellular mechanisms [35, 37].
Similarly, retinoids, which have long been used in antiaging skincare, have been found to modulate gene expression related to collagen production and cell turnover [38]. Some evidence suggests that retinoids also influence DNA methylation patterns, reversing age‐associated changes and promoting skin rejuvenation at a molecular level. This implies that retinoids and other topical agents could reset epigenetic clocks in the skin, effectively slowing down or reversing the age‐related dynamics. Moreover, dihydromyricetin (DHM), a natural flavonoid compound, has gained attention for its ability to inhibit DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1), an enzyme responsible for maintaining DNA methylation patterns [39]. DHM has been shown to reduce DNA methylation in aging skin, reactivating silenced genes involved in cellular repair and skin regeneration. This discovery has significant potential implications for the development of antiaging therapies that address the root causes of skin aging [40, 41]. This will require further clinical studies to prove the antiaging benefit of such a strategy. Other active skincare ingredients, such as curcumin, genistein, and dihydromyricetin (DHM), have shown promising activities in inhibiting DNMT1 [39, 42, 43, 44].
To further enhance this understanding, it is crucial to explore the connections between the 12 hallmarks of aging: genomic instability, telomere attrition, epigenetic alterations, loss of proteostasis, disabled macroautophagy, deregulated nutrient‐sensing, mitochondrial dysfunction, cellular senescence, stem cell exhaustion, altered intercellular communication, chronic inflammation, and dysbiosis, and their visible manifestations on the skin [26, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]. These hallmarks are the foundation of biological aging and directly influence skin health. For instance, mitochondrial dysfunction and chronic inflammation accelerate the appearance of aging through oxidative stress and cellular damage, while epigenetic alterations contribute to changes in gene expression that affect skin elasticity and firmness [46, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56]. Recognizing these hallmarks allows for a more comprehensive approach to aesthetic interventions, shifting the goal from merely addressing superficial signs of aging to targeting the root causes at the molecular and cellular levels [45]. This integrative strategy bridges the fields of aesthetic dermatology and the science of longevity, paving the way for interventions that enhance the skin's appearance and support overall vitality and well‐being. By aligning aesthetic treatments with the underlying biological and cellular mechanisms of aging, practitioners can offer solutions that promote long‐term skin health and resilience, setting a new standard in personalized, effective skin rejuvenation (Table 1).
TABLE 1.
Targetable factors related to epigenetics and skin aging.
| Targetable factor | Mechanism | Aesthetic intervention |
|---|---|---|
| DNA methylation | Alters gene expression | Retinoids, lasers, antioxidants |
| Histone modifications | Regulates chromatin accessibility | Epigenetic modulators, skincare ingredients |
| Oxidative stress | Damages DNA and proteins | Antioxidants, dietary changes |
| Inflammation | Drives chronic tissue damage | Anti‐inflammatory diets, circadian alignment |
| Mitochondrial dysfunction | Reduces cellular energy | Mitochondria‐targeted therapies |
| Microbiome imbalance | Influences epigenetic pathways | Probiotics, microbiome‐targeted therapies |
6. Personalizing Aesthetic Treatments Through Biological Clocks
One of the most promising applications of biological clocks in aesthetic dermatology is the ability to personalize treatment plans. By measuring a patient's biological age, dermatologists can tailor interventions more precisely to their individual needs. Biological clocks are tested by analyzing DNA methylation patterns using tools like Horvath's Clock and GrimAge. A biological sample, such as blood or saliva, is collected, and DNA is extracted and analyzed for methylation at specific CpG sites. Algorithms then calculate biological age by comparing methylation patterns to reference datasets, measuring how “old” a patient's body is at the molecular level. Patients with a higher biological age relative to their chronological age could also benefit from more aggressive treatments, such as a combination of injectables, lasers, and topical agents, to achieve optimal results [57]. Conversely, those with a lower biological age require fewer intensive interventions. Moreover, monitoring biological age through epigenetic clocks allows assessing treatment efficacy over time. By periodically measuring a patient's biological age, dermatologists can determine whether a particular intervention impacts the skin's aging process. This approach would guide maintenance therapies, ensuring that patients receive the right treatments at the right intervals to prolong the effects of their aesthetic procedures.
7. The Impact of External Factors on Skin Aging
External factors such as UV radiation, smoking, pollution, lifestyle choices, and sleep quality are among the most significant contributors to skin aging, acting alongside intrinsic biological processes [58]. UV radiation accelerates the degradation of collagen and elastin, induces oxidative stress, and leads to DNA damage that manifests in pigmentation, wrinkles, and reduced skin elasticity. Similarly, smoking exacerbates aging through the depletion of antioxidants and the generation of free radicals, impairing skin repair mechanisms and promoting inflammation [59]. Environmental pollution compounds these effects by introducing toxins that disrupt the skin barrier and accelerate cellular aging. Poor lifestyle habits, such as inadequate nutrition, lack of exercise, and chronic stress, further impair skin health by increasing cortisol levels, reducing circulation, and hindering the body's ability to repair and regenerate [60]. In particular, lack of sleep disrupts the skin's natural circadian rhythm, leading to decreased cellular turnover, weakened barrier function, and heightened oxidative stress, which accelerates physiological changes [61, 62, 63].
8. Understanding Aging at the Cellular Level
Aging is a highly intricate biological process driven by an interplay of structural, signaling, and metabolic dysfunctions that impact cellular integrity, tissue repair, and overall systemic health [64]. At the structural level, DNA instability and epigenetic changes represent two of the most fundamental drivers of aging, disrupting genetic integrity and altering gene expression in ways that impair cellular function [65]. These changes, combined with the loss of proteostasis, accumulate damaged or misfolded proteins, which compromise cellular health and contribute to degenerative processes. Such structural damage becomes increasingly prevalent with age, weakening the body's ability to maintain the delicate balance required for optimal functionality [66]. Metabolic dysfunctions play an equally critical role in the cellular mechanisms. Mitochondrial dysfunction, characterized by reduced energy production and increased oxidative stress, accelerates cellular aging and impairs tissue regeneration [67]. Meanwhile, alterations in the microbiome, particularly in the skin and gut, disrupt the symbiotic relationships essential for maintaining immune responses and barrier integrity [68, 69]. The effects of cell senescence, wherein damaged cells cease to divide but remain metabolically active, further amplify these metabolic disruptions by creating a pro‐inflammatory environment that accelerates tissue decline [70]. Signaling dysfunctions exacerbate age‐related dynamics by interfering with communication pathways necessary for maintaining cellular balance. Chronic microinflammation, often referred to as “inflammageing”, creates a persistent low‐grade inflammatory state that contributes to the progression of age‐related diseases, from cardiovascular disorders to skin degradation [71]. Stem cell exhaustion, another hallmark of aging, reflects the gradual depletion of regenerative cells, reducing the body's capacity for repair and renewal [72]. Disruptions in cellular communication further undermine the coordination required for proper immune response, tissue healing, and overall systemic equilibrium [46]. Together, these interconnected hallmarks illustrate that aging is not caused by a single mechanism but rather by a network of cumulative dysfunctions that act synergistically over time [73]. Importantly, many of these processes are influenced by external factors such as UV radiation, pollution, smoking, and poor lifestyle habits, which accelerate structural damage, promote inflammation, and exacerbate metabolic imbalances. By understanding the intricate mechanisms of aging, researchers and practitioners can develop targeted therapies and preventive strategies, such as enhancing mitochondrial function, supporting microbiome health, and reducing inflammation through antioxidants, dietary interventions, and advanced therapeutic technologies [50]. This holistic approach promises to slow physiological changes while improving quality of life by promoting resilience, vitality, and overall health.
9. Epigenetic Plasticity and Environmental Interventions
In conjunction with aesthetic treatments, lifestyle, and environmental interventions could significantly modulate biological age. Studies have demonstrated that dietary interventions (e.g., caloric restriction and intermittent fasting), in addition to exercise, can positively influence DNA methylation patterns, potentially decelerating biological aging [74]. A diet rich in antioxidants, polyphenols, and anti‐inflammatory nutrients can counteract the harmful epigenetic effects of UV radiation and pollution, supporting healthy skin [75, 76, 77, 78]. Furthermore, circadian rhythm regulation has emerged as a key factor in maintaining skin health and modulating epigenetic patterns. The skin has its own circadian clock, which regulates processes like DNA repair, cell turnover, and barrier function. Disruption of this clock by environmental factors such as irregular sleep patterns, chronic stress, and artificial light exposure can accelerate aging at the epigenetic level [62, 79]. Incorporating circadian‐aligned skincare regimens, along with sleep hygiene practices, could provide novel approaches to modulating epigenetic clocks and enhancing the outcomes of aesthetic interventions.
10. The Microbiome and Epigenetics in Skin Aging
The connection between the skin microbiome and epigenetics highlights the role of microbial metabolites in influencing host gene expression through DNA methylation and histone modifications. For instance, the production of short‐chain fatty acids (SCFAs) like butyrate by gut and skin microbes has been shown to regulate histone acetylation, a critical epigenetic process. While robust evidence of microbiome‐derived metabolites modulating systemic epigenetic pathways exists, studies linking these mechanisms directly to the skin remain limited. Emerging research, such as Min et al.'s review of the microbiome's influence on aging clocks, underscores the potential for microbial interventions to modulate epigenetic aging markers [80]. They outlined how gut and skin microbiota can construct aging clocks based on taxonomy, biodiversity, and functional pathways in their review. They highlight the microbiome's role in producing metabolites such as SCFAs, which regulate epigenetic processes by serving as substrates or modulators for histone acetylation and DNA methylation enzymes. These mechanisms demonstrate the indirect influence of microbiota on epigenetic aging clocks like the Horvath clock, where DNA methylation patterns are key predictors of biological age [81, 82]. However, while indirect evidence supports this relationship, only limited studies have directly demonstrated how skin bacterial metabolites influence specific epigenetic modifications like DNA methylation. Expanding this area of research is crucial to understanding the microbiome's potential as a target for epigenetic‐based therapies in aesthetic dermatology. Conversely, restoring microbial balance through probiotics, prebiotics, or microbiome‐targeted therapies could positively influence the skin's epigenetic landscape and promote longevity [68, 83].
11. Senescence and Epigenetics: Cellular Reprogramming in Aesthetic Dermatology
Cellular senescence is another critical aspect of skin aging that intersects with epigenetics. Senescent cells exhibit an altered gene expression profile, often driven by epigenetic changes such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, and chromatin remodeling [84]. These cells accumulate with age and contribute to tissue dysfunction by secreting pro‐inflammatory cytokines, matrix‐degrading enzymes, and growth factors, a phenomenon known as the senescence‐associated secretory phenotype [30]. Recent advances in cellular reprogramming techniques, particularly the work involving Yamanaka factors (OCT4, SOX2, KLF4, and c‐MYC), have shown promise in reversing cellular senescence and resetting epigenetic markers of aging [85, 86]. Although currently more experimental, the possibility of transiently inducing a youthful gene expression profile through reprogramming could hold the key to reversing visible skin aging and intrinsic molecular damage [87]. In aesthetic dermatology, this would lead to the development of advanced therapies that reset epigenetic clocks at the cellular level, effectively slowing or reversing skin aging.
12. Biological Age in Personalized Aesthetics
Biological age transforms aesthetic dermatology by enabling personalized treatments and objective efficacy assessment. Unlike chronological age, which reflects only the passage of time, biological age reveals the cellular and molecular health of the skin, offering a more accurate measure of aging [88]. This information allows practitioners to tailor interventions such as EBDs and injectables to a patient's unique skin profile. For example, individuals with a lower biological age may benefit from non‐invasive treatments like fractional lasers, while those with a higher biological age might require more intensive combinations of therapies to address advanced aging signs. Epigenetic data also provide tools to monitor treatment efficacy. By analyzing pre‐ and post‐treatment DNA methylation changes, dermatologists can quantify the impact of procedures such as laser resurfacing or retinoid application at the molecular level. This approach validates treatment outcomes and informs adjustments for maintenance and optimization. Moreover, integrating biological age insights fosters a holistic strategy that aligns clinical interventions with the patient's underlying skin health, setting a new standard in precision aesthetics.
13. Aesthetic Dermatology and the Beyond: Longevity, Epigenetic Clocks, and Cancer
An important aspect of epigenetic clocks that extends beyond aesthetics is their potential to predict and prevent cancer along with a wide range of human diseases. Epigenetic drift plays a significant role in both cancer and aging due to their many common molecular pathways [89]. The molecular pathways involved in cancer and aging lead to the silencing of tumor suppressor genes or the activation of oncogenes, increasing cancer risk. Similarly, aberrant DNA methylation contributes to the onset of other age‐related diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer's, and metabolic conditions like diabetes. By using epigenetic clocks to monitor biological age and the accumulation of disease‐related changes, there is potential not only to gauge a patient's risk of cancer but also for early intervention in preventing a variety of chronic conditions [89]. Rejuvenation strategies that reset epigenetic markers would reduce the incidence of these diseases by restoring proper gene function and improving cellular health. This highlights epigenetic research's dual role in promoting skin longevity and contributing to broader health strategies that target age‐related diseases. The ability to modulate biological age at the molecular level through aesthetic and therapeutic interventions illustrates how aesthetics, human health, and longevity are becoming increasingly interconnected, paving the way for more comprehensive approaches to disease prevention and overall well‐being.
14. Challenges and Ethical Considerations
While the application of epigenetic clocks and other molecular tools in dermatology offers great promise, several challenges must be addressed. First, more longitudinal studies are needed to validate the long‐term effects of aesthetic interventions on biological age. While some treatments have been shown to influence epigenetic markers in the short term, their long‐term impact on skin health and longevity remains unclear. Additionally, the use of biological age as a metric for treatment decisions raises ethical questions, such as whether patients should be informed of their biological age if it differs significantly from their chronological age, and if so, how this information should be communicated and how it might influence a patient's perception of aging and themselves. Another challenge lies in the accessibility of these advanced tools. Although epigenetic clocks offer valuable insights into aging processes, their adoption in clinical practice is hindered by high costs and the need for specialized equipment, limiting their availability to a broader patient population. Addressing these barriers is essential to ensure equitable access to these innovations, preventing disparities between patients who can afford high‐end aesthetic treatments and those who cannot. Additionally, differences in life expectancy between men and women, influenced by hormonal and environmental factors, add complexity to longevity research. These variations underscore the importance of developing sex‐specific approaches in both aesthetic and epigenetic interventions to ensure personalized and effective treatments [90]. Lastly, the integration of biological age assessments into aesthetic practices introduces data privacy concerns. Epigenetic data are sensitive and must be protected with robust measures to ensure confidentiality and prevent misuse. Practitioners must also consider how biological age might shape societal views on aging, potentially reinforcing stigma or creating unrealistic beauty standards. Balancing these ethical dimensions with the opportunities offered by these tools will be key to advancing a responsible and inclusive approach in aesthetic dermatology. As technology evolves, it is crucial to develop frameworks that enhance precision in treatments and uphold the well‐being, equity, and trust of patients.
15. The Interplay Between Aging, Appearance, Well‐Being, and Quality of Life
The connection between appearance, well‐being, and mental health is deeply rooted in human experience, as physical appearance often plays a pivotal role in shaping self‐esteem, social interactions, and overall quality of life [91]. The perception of beauty by others plays a crucial role in shaping how individuals feel about themselves, often impacting their mental health and emotional resilience. The transition from “how I Look” to “how I feel” reflects a deeper understanding of the interplay between physical appearance and mental well‐being. Enhancing one's outward beauty often fosters confidence and self‐esteem, contributing to a more positive emotional state. This perspective extends behavior, as improved mental health often leads to better interpersonal relationships and productivity. Addressing physical appearance not only alleviates self‐consciousness but also supports psychological resilience, allowing individuals to lead more fulfilling lives. Studies, such as those by Porcheron et al. underscore the profound mental impact of facial contrast, a key visual cue for age perception [92, 93]. Their findings show that facial contrast universally decreases with age across all racial groups, influencing how individuals are perceived socially and how they perceive themselves. Importantly, they demonstrated that enhancing facial contrast can make faces appear younger, independent of the ethnic or cultural background of the observers. This universal link between facial contrast and perceived youthfulness suggests that addressing these subtle visual cues could significantly improve individuals' self‐esteem, reduce social anxiety, and foster a more positive self‐image. Haykal et al. emphasize the transformative role of aesthetic dermatology in enhancing both lifespan and health span by addressing visible signs of aging alongside deeper biological mechanisms, such as epigenetic changes, that affect aging and resilience [94, 95]. By focusing on treatments that improve outward appearance and modulate cellular processes linked to epigenetics, these interventions alleviate psychological burdens like social anxiety and self‐consciousness, fostering confidence and self‐acceptance [96]. This dual impact enhances emotional well‐being and improves quality of life [97]. Additionally, it highlights the growing recognition of aesthetic dermatology as a field that integrates advances in epigenetic science with personalized care, offering holistic solutions that rejuvenate appearance while addressing the underlying biological mechanisms of aging, promoting sustainable results that enhance physical and emotional balance [98]. On the other hand, positive psychological traits like optimism have been linked to exceptional longevity, as highlighted in epidemiologic studies [99]. These findings suggest that fostering mental resilience and emotional well‐being could be valuable adjuncts to interventions targeting epigenetic mechanisms in aesthetic dermatology. These extrinsic factors amplify visible signs of aging while contributing to long‐term molecular damage. By combining advanced science with personalized care, this forward‐thinking approach fosters innovations that enhance aesthetics, mental well‐being, and the overall quality of life for patients.
16. Broader Implications
Integrating epigenetics into dermatological practice offers significant potential to enhance patient outcomes. By addressing the root causes of skin aging at the molecular level, personalized interventions can provide more effective, long‐lasting results. This integration improves overall skin health and potentially delays age‐related diseases by promoting cellular resilience and reducing systemic inflammation [32]. Understanding the interplay between DNA methylation and environmental factors can help tailor treatments that mitigate extrinsic aging influences like UV damage and pollution. Conducting longitudinal research to monitor changes in epigenetic markers postintervention is essential. These studies would provide robust data on the efficacy of lasers, radiofrequency, or topical agents in modulating biological age and improving skin health [100]. Ethical considerations surrounding the disclosure of biological age to patients need to be addressed [101, 102]. Guidelines should focus on transparency and sensitivity, ensuring patients fully understand the implications of their biological age assessments while preventing undue psychological stress. Investigating sex‐specific differences in epigenetic aging is crucial for developing tailored interventions. Hormonal variations and distinct environmental exposures between men and women influence the aging process, necessitating personalized strategies to maximize treatment efficacy.
17. Adoption in Everyday Practice
Implementing epigenetic insights into everyday practice begins with integrating cost‐effective diagnostic tools that measure biological age. These tools can enable practitioners to assess a patient's unique epigenetic profile, allowing for tailored interventions that address individual needs [81]. The integration of epigenetic data into everyday practice is hindered by the lack of accessible tools for real‐time analysis, which can be addressed by investing in AI‐driven technologies to streamline data interpretation, enabling seamless integration of epigenetic insights into clinical workflows [103]. For instance, patients with accelerated biological aging might benefit from a combination of EBDs and intensive skincare regimens, while those with a slower biological aging rate may require minimal interventions focused on maintenance [33]. Lifestyle modifications play a critical role in complementing aesthetic treatments. Practitioners can incorporate counseling on nutrition, physical activity, sleep hygiene, and stress management to enhance the overall effectiveness of interventions [24, 79, 104]. This holistic approach ensures that patients see aesthetic improvements while simultaneously experiencing enhanced systemic health, which contributes to longer‐lasting results and greater satisfaction. Regularly monitoring biomarkers is essential for assessing treatment efficacy and guiding adjustments to personalized care plans [26, 45]. For example, periodic evaluations of DNA methylation patterns can inform whether interventions effectively reverse or slow down epigenetic changes associated with aging. By tracking these markers, practitioners can refine treatment strategies to optimize outcomes and ensure continued progress over time.
The integration of advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, can further facilitate the adoption of epigenetic approaches in clinical settings. AI‐driven tools can analyze complex data sets, providing real‐time insights into treatment effectiveness and predicting patient outcomes [103]. This enables practitioners to make data‐driven decisions with greater precision and efficiency. Additionally, leveraging telemedicine platforms to provide remote consultations and follow‐ups can expand access to personalized epigenetic care, particularly for patients in underserved areas.
Educating patients about the benefits of epigenetic‐based treatments is equally important [102]. Providing clear explanations of how interventions address the molecular mechanisms of aging fosters trust and encourages patient engagement. This understanding empowers patients to actively participate in their treatment journey, further enhancing the collaborative relationship between practitioner and patient.
18. Future Directions in Aesthetic Dermatology: Harnessing the Power of Epigenetics
The future of aesthetic dermatology lies in the continued integration of epigenetic research into clinical practice, revolutionizing how we understand and address the aging process [105]. As our knowledge of epigenetic clocks deepens, these molecular biomarkers will enable more precise assessments of biological age, allowing for highly personalized, evidence‐based approaches to skin rejuvenation [3]. Treatments that target visible signs of aging while simultaneously addressing underlying molecular processes, such as DNA methylation and histone modification, will become increasingly prevalent [106]. This dual focus promises to deliver longer‐lasting, more effective results, moving beyond superficial enhancements to achieve holistic and sustainable skin health [107]. Emerging therapies are set to redefine the landscape of aesthetic medicine. Topical agents designed to modulate DNA methylation or histone acetylation could offer targeted interventions to reverse age‐related changes at the epigenetic level, improving skin texture, elasticity, and resilience. Systemic treatments, including epigenetic reprogramming agents and advanced nutraceuticals, would provide whole‐body rejuvenation by addressing the hallmarks of aging, such as genomic instability, inflammation, and mitochondrial dysfunction [108]. To measure whether epigenetic changes occur due to applied treatments, it is essential to leverage advanced molecular tools such as DNA methylation profiling. This involves periodic analysis of specific CpG sites using validated epigenetic clocks, such as Horvath's Clock or GrimAge, to detect shifts in DNA methylation patterns. These innovations hold the potential to enhance skin appearance while improving the overall healthspan and quality of life.
Moreover, advancements in biotechnology, such as the use of AI‐driven analysis and machine learning, are expected to refine epigenetic diagnostics further. These tools will help clinicians identify precise intervention points, predict treatment outcomes, and optimize therapeutic strategies for individual patients [109]. Innovations in delivery systems, such as nanotechnology and bioengineered carriers, could ensure that epigenetic therapies reach their targets with maximal efficacy and minimal side effects. Future developments may also integrate lifestyle interventions into aesthetic dermatology, recognizing the profound impact of diet, exercise, and circadian rhythm alignment on epigenetic regulation [104, 110, 111]. For instance, personalized skincare routines and treatment plans could be complemented by lifestyle coaching to enhance and sustain results. The role of microbiome‐targeted therapies in modulating epigenetic pathways is another area poised for significant growth, offering new avenues to promote skin longevity and resilience [112]. By bridging the gap between cosmetic enhancement and longevity science, the field will empower patients to achieve healthier, more vibrant skin while embracing a more comprehensive approach to aging. This transformative integration of epigenetics into clinical practice will undoubtedly set new standards for personalized care, redefining what is possible in the pursuit of beauty, vitality, and longevity.
19. Conclusion
The integration of epigenetic clocks and related research into aesthetic dermatology marks the beginning of a new era in skin rejuvenation. By understanding the molecular mechanisms that drive aging, dermatologists can offer more personalized, effective, and long‐lasting treatments that promote longevity while addressing deeper concerns beyond surface‐level issues. The ability to modulate biological age, promote skin health, and extend the longevity of aesthetic results is becoming increasingly achievable as research evolves. Epigenetic clocks are powerful tools to assess the effectiveness of aesthetic interventions and tailor treatments to each patient's unique needs. These innovations signal a bright future for aesthetic dermatology, combined with advancements in epigenetic therapies and a growing understanding of how environmental factors influence skin aging. This shift goes beyond traditional antiaging techniques, embracing the concept of longevity by fostering skin health that reflects an extended health span, enhanced beauty, and emotional well‐being. The profound connection between beauty and mental health is central to this evolution. Physical appearance directly influences self‐esteem, social confidence, and overall psychological well‐being. Aesthetic dermatology uniquely addresses this interrelation by offering treatments that improve outward appearance while simultaneously alleviating the psychological burdens of aging, such as self‐consciousness and social anxiety. By enhancing beauty, practitioners play a vital role in fostering a sense of self‐acceptance, emotional resilience, and improved mental health, ultimately contributing to a better quality of life for their patients. Breakthroughs in longevity biotechnology, including AI, biomarkers, and insights from geriatric science, intertwine aesthetic interventions with strategies that promote lasting health. Dermatologists are now poised to align the pursuit of beauty with the science of aging and mental well‐being, highlighting the transformative potential of their practice. Nonetheless, it is crucial to reinforce the importance of prevention through primary and secondary measures, such as broad‐spectrum photoprotection and healthy lifestyle habits. These preventive actions are essential for maintaining long‐term skin health and preserving the delicate balance between physical beauty and mental well‐being, ensuring sustainable and meaningful results.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting this study's findings are available upon reasonable request.
References
- 1. Dhar G. A., Saha S., Mitra P., and Nag Chaudhuri R., “DNA Methylation and Regulation of Gene Expression: Guardian of Our Health,” Nucleus 64, no. 3 (2021): 259–270, 10.1007/s13237-021-00367-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Bienkowska A., Raddatz G., Söhle J., et al., “Development of an Epigenetic Clock to Predict Visual Age Progression of Human Skin,” Frontiers in Aging 4 (2024): 1258183, 10.3389/fragi.2023.1258183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Duan R., Fu Q., Sun Y., and Li Q., “Epigenetic Clock: A Promising Biomarker and Practical Tool in Aging,” Ageing Research Reviews 81 (2022): 101743, 10.1016/j.arr.2022.101743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Flament F., Maudet A., and Bayer‐Vanmoen M., “The Objective and Subjective Impact of a Daily Self‐Massage on Visible Signs of Stress on the Skin and Emotional Well‐Being,” International Journal of Cosmetic Science 45, no. 6 (2023): 761–768, 10.1111/ics.12884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Flament F., Abric A., and Adam A. S., “Evaluating the Respective Weights of Some Facial Signs on Perceived Ages in Differently Aged Women of Five Ethnic Origins,” Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 20, no. 3 (2021): 842–853, 10.1111/jocd.13612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Liu R., Zhao E., Yu H., Yuan C., Abbas M. N., and Cui H., “Methylation Across the Central Dogma in Health and Diseases: New Therapeutic Strategies,” Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 8, no. 1 (2023): 1–46, 10.1038/s41392-023-01528-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Winnefeld M. and Lyko F., “The Aging Epigenome: DNA Methylation From the Cradle to the Grave,” Genome Biology 13, no. 7 (2012): 165, 10.1186/gb-2012-13-7-165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Nakamura A., Kataoka K., Takatsuka S., and Takenouchi T., “Aging Trends in Skin Cancer: A Long‐Term Observational Study in Japan,” JAAD International 13 (2023): 32–34, 10.1016/j.jdin.2023.07.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Sachdev P. S., Lammel A., Trollor J. N., et al., “A Comprehensive Neuropsychiatric Study of Elderly Twins: The Older Australian Twins Study,” Twin Research and Human Genetics: The Official Journal of the International Society for Twin Studies 12, no. 6 (2009): 573–582, 10.1375/twin.12.6.573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Heath A. C., Martin N. G., Lynskey M. T., Todorov A. A., and Madden P. A. F., “Estimating Two‐Stage Models for Genetic Influences on Alcohol, Tobacco or Drug Use Initiation and Dependence Vulnerability in Twin and Family Data,” Twin Research and Human Genetics: The Official Journal of the International Society for Twin Studies 5, no. 2 (2002): 113–124, 10.1375/1369052022983. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Guyuron B., Rowe D. J., Weinfeld A. B., Eshraghi Y., Fathi A., and Iamphongsai S., “Factors Contributing to the Facial Aging of Identical Twins,” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 123, no. 4 (2009): 1321–1331, 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31819c4d42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Micevic G., Theodosakis N., and Bosenberg M., “Aberrant DNA Methylation in Melanoma: Biomarker and Therapeutic Opportunities,” Clinical Epigenetics 9, no. 1 (2017): 34, 10.1186/s13148-017-0332-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Pramio D. T., Kashiwabara A. Y., Pennacchi P. C., et al., “Epigenetic Signature of Differentially Methylated Genes in Cutaneous Melanoma,” Applied Cancer Research 37, no. 1 (2017): 34, 10.1186/s41241-017-0041-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Horvath S., “DNA Methylation Age of Human Tissues and Cell Types,” Genome Biology 14, no. 10 (2013): R115, 10.1186/gb-2013-14-10-r115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Lu A. T., Quach A., Wilson J. G., et al., “DNA Methylation GrimAge Strongly Predicts Lifespan and Healthspan,” Aging 11, no. 2 (2019): 303–327, 10.18632/aging.101684. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Levine M. E., Lu A. T., Quach A., et al., “An Epigenetic Biomarker of Aging for Lifespan and Healthspan,” Aging 10, no. 4 (2018): 573–591, 10.18632/aging.101414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Sharma‐Oates A., Sullivan J., Pestana D., Dos Santos C. C., Binnie A., and Lord J. M., “Association of Epigenetic Age and Outcome in Critically Ill Patients,” Critical Care Explorations 6, no. 2 (2024): e1044, 10.1097/CCE.0000000000001044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Kim Y., Huan T., Joehanes R., et al., “Higher Diet Quality Relates to Decelerated Epigenetic Aging,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 115, no. 1 (2022): 163–170, 10.1093/ajcn/nqab201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Belsky D. W., Caspi A., Arseneault L., et al., “Quantification of the Pace of Biological Aging in Humans Through a Blood Test, the DunedinPoAm DNA Methylation Algorithm,” eLife 9 (2020): e54870, 10.7554/eLife.54870. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Horvath S., Oshima J., Martin G. M., et al., “Epigenetic Clock for Skin and Blood Cells Applied to Hutchinson Gilford Progeria Syndrome and Ex Vivo Studies,” Aging (Albany NY) 10, no. 7 (2018): 1758–1775, 10.18632/aging.101508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Rutledge J., Oh H., and Wyss‐Coray T., “Measuring Biological Age Using Omics Data,” Nature Reviews. Genetics 23, no. 12 (2022): 715–727, 10.1038/s41576-022-00511-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Flament F., Bazin R., and Piot B., “Influence of Gravity Upon Some Facial Signs,” International Journal of Cosmetic Science 37, no. 3 (2015): 291–297, 10.1111/ics.12198. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Flament F., Bazin R., Laquieze S., Rubert V., Simonpietri E., and Piot B., “Effect of the Sun on Visible Clinical Signs of Aging in Caucasian Skin,” Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology 6 (2013): 221–232, 10.2147/CCID.S44686. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Flament F., Bazin R., Qiu H., et al., “Solar Exposure(s) and Facial Clinical Signs of Aging in Chinese Women: Impacts Upon Age Perception,” Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology 8 (2015): 75–84, 10.2147/CCID.S72244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Foucher A., Nouveau S., Piffaut V., Marque S., Aguilar L., and Cavusoglu N., “Clinical vs. Chronological Skin Age: Exploring Determinants and Stratum Corneum Protein Markers of Differential Skin Ageing in 351 Healthy Women,” Scientific Reports 14, no. 1 (2024): 23643, 10.1038/s41598-024-65083-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Biomarkers of Aging Consortium , Herzog C. M. S., Goeminne L. J. E., et al., “Challenges and Recommendations for the Translation of Biomarkers of Aging,” Nature Aging 4, no. 10 (2024): 1372–1383, 10.1038/s43587-024-00683-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Maudet A., Le Bec J., Flament F., et al., “Analysis of Images Supplied by Skincam® Can Record the Changes of Some Scar Features That Occur Over Time. Comparisons With the Assessments of Dermatologist and Patients' Perception,” Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 22, no. 4 (2023): 1334–1343, 10.1111/jocd.15575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Flament F., Jiang R., Houghton J., et al., “Accuracy and Clinical Relevance of an Automated, Algorithm‐Based Analysis of Facial Signs From Selfie Images of Women in the United States of Various Ages, Ancestries and Phototypes: A Cross‐Sectional Observational Study,” Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 37, no. 1 (2023): 176–183, 10.1111/jdv.18541. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Webb W. R., Rao P., Carruthers J. D. A., et al., “The Aging Paradox: Integrating Biological, Genetic, Epigenetic, and Aesthetic Insights Into Skin Aging and Non‐Surgical Interventions,” European Journal of Plastic Surgery 47, no. 1 (2024): 92, 10.1007/s00238-024-02239-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Bormann F., Rodríguez‐Paredes M., Hagemann S., et al., “Reduced DNA Methylation Patterning and Transcriptional Connectivity Define Human Skin Aging,” Aging Cell 15, no. 3 (2016): 563–571, 10.1111/acel.12470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Johnson A. A., Akman K., Calimport S. R. G., Wuttke D., Stolzing A., and de Magalhães J. P., “The Role of DNA Methylation in Aging, Rejuvenation, and Age‐Related Disease,” Rejuvenation Research 15, no. 5 (2012): 483–494, 10.1089/rej.2012.1324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Masson E., “Role of Epigenetics in the Regulation of Skin Aging and Geroprotective Intervention: A New Sight,” EM‐Consulte, accessed September 28, 2024, https://www.em‐consulte.com/article/1661247/role‐of‐epigenetics‐in‐the‐regulation‐of‐skin‐agin. [DOI] [PubMed]
- 33. Haykal D., Will F., Cartier H., and Dahan S., “Epigenetic Modifications and the Role of Medical Lasers in Enhancing Skin Regeneration,” Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 24, no. 1 (2025): 16780, 10.1111/jocd.16780. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Schmitt L., Huth S., Amann P. M., et al., “Direct Biological Effects of Fractional Ultrapulsed CO2 Laser Irradiation on Keratinocytes and Fibroblasts in Human Organotypic Full‐Thickness 3D Skin Models,” Lasers in Medical Science 33, no. 4 (2018): 765–772, 10.1007/s10103-017-2409-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Kokikian N., Arenzo J., Gasilla J., et al., “857 Fractional Non‐Ablative Laser Has a Divergent Impact on Molecular Markers of Aging,” Journal of Investigative Dermatology 144, no. 8 (2024): S149, 10.1016/j.jid.2024.06.873. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Leaker B. D., Fuchs C., and Tam J., “When Wounds Are Good for You: The Regenerative Capacity of Fractional Resurfacing and Potential Utility in Chronic Wound Prevention,” Advances in Wound Care 8, no. 12 (2019): 679–691, 10.1089/wound.2019.0945. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Zhang W., Qu J., Liu G. H., and Belmonte J. C. I., “The Ageing Epigenome and Its Rejuvenation,” Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology 21, no. 3 (2020): 137–150, 10.1038/s41580-019-0204-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Quan T., “Human Skin Aging and the Anti‐Aging Properties of Retinol,” Biomolecules 13, no. 11 (2023): 1614, 10.3390/biom13111614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Falckenhayn C., Bienkowska A., Söhle J., et al., “Identification of Dihydromyricetin as a Natural DNA Methylation Inhibitor With Rejuvenating Activity in Human Skin,” Frontiers in Aging 4 (2024): 1258184, 10.3389/fragi.2023.1258184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Wang K., Liu H., Hu Q., et al., “Epigenetic Regulation of Aging: Implications for Interventions of Aging and Diseases,” Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 7, no. 1 (2022): 1–22, 10.1038/s41392-022-01211-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Georgakopoulou E. A., Valsamidi C., Veroutis D., and Havaki S., “The Bright and Dark Side of Skin Senescence. Could Skin Rejuvenation Anti‐Senescence Interventions Become a “Bright” New Strategy for the Prevention of Age‐Related Skin Pathologies?,” Mechanisms of Ageing and Development 193 (2021): 111409, 10.1016/j.mad.2020.111409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Minoretti P. and Emanuele E., “Clinically Actionable Topical Strategies for Addressing the Hallmarks of Skin Aging: A Primer for Aesthetic Medicine Practitioners,” Cureus 16, no. 1 (2024): e52548, 10.7759/cureus.52548. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Ming T., Tao Q., Tang S., et al., “Curcumin: An Epigenetic Regulator and Its Application in Cancer,” Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy 156 (2022): 113956, 10.1016/j.biopha.2022.113956. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Xie Q., Bai Q., Zou L. Y., et al., “Genistein Inhibits DNA Methylation and Increases Expression of Tumor Suppressor Genes in Human Breast Cancer Cells,” Genes, Chromosomes & Cancer 53, no. 5 (2014): 422–431, 10.1002/gcc.22154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Lyu Y. X., Fu Q., Wilczok D., et al., “Longevity Biotechnology: Bridging AI, Biomarkers, Geroscience and Clinical Applications for Healthy Longevity,” Aging 16, no. 20 (2024): 12955–12976, 10.18632/aging.206135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. López‐Otín C., Blasco M. A., Partridge L., Serrano M., and Kroemer G., “Hallmarks of Aging: An Expanding Universe,” Cell 186, no. 2 (2023): 243–278, 10.1016/j.cell.2022.11.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Marrot L. and Meunier J. R., “Skin DNA Photodamage and Its Biological Consequences,” Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 58, no. 5 Suppl 2 (2008): S139–S148, 10.1016/j.jaad.2007.12.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Del Bino S. and Bernerd F., “Variations in Skin Colour and the Biological Consequences of Ultraviolet Radiation Exposure,” British Journal of Dermatology 169, no. 3 (2013): 33–40, 10.1111/bjd.12529. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Bernerd F., Passeron T., Castiel I., and Marionnet C., “The Damaging Effects of Long UVA (UVA1) Rays: A Major Challenge to Preserve Skin Health and Integrity,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23, no. 15 (2022): 8243, 10.3390/ijms23158243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Myers T., Bouslimani A., Huang S., et al., “A Multi‐Study Analysis Enables Identification of Potential Microbial Features Associated With Skin Aging Signs,” Frontiers in Aging 4 (2023): 1304705, 10.3389/fragi.2023.1304705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Waldera Lupa D. M., Kalfalah F., Safferling K., et al., “Characterization of Skin Aging‐Associated Secreted Proteins (SAASP) Produced by Dermal Fibroblasts Isolated From Intrinsically Aged Human Skin,” Journal of Investigative Dermatology 135, no. 8 (2015): 1954–1968, 10.1038/jid.2015.120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Duval C., Bourreau E., Warrick E., Bastien P., Nouveau S., and Bernerd F., “A Chronic Pro‐Inflammatory Environment Contributes to the Physiopathology of Actinic Lentigines,” Scientific Reports 14, no. 1 (2024): 5256, 10.1038/s41598-024-53990-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Chan T. K., Bramono D., Bourokba N., et al., “Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Regulate the Pigmentation Pathway and Induce DNA Damage Responses in Keratinocytes, a Process Driven by Systemic Immunity,” Journal of Dermatological Science 104, no. 2 (2021): 83–94, 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2021.09.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Ung T. P. L., Lim S., Solinas X., et al., “Simultaneous NAD(P)H and FAD Fluorescence Lifetime Microscopy of Long UVA–Induced Metabolic Stress in Reconstructed Human Skin,” Scientific Reports 11, no. 1 (2021): 22171, 10.1038/s41598-021-00126-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Shamalnasab M., Gravel S. P., St‐Pierre J., Breton L., Jäger S., and Aguilaniu H., “A Salicylic Acid Derivative Extends the Lifespan of Caenorhabditis elegans by Activating Autophagy and the Mitochondrial Unfolded Protein Response,” Aging Cell 17, no. 6 (2018): e12830, 10.1111/acel.12830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Desjardins D., Cacho‐Valadez B., Liu J., et al., “Antioxidants Reveal an Inverted U‐Shaped Dose‐Response Relationship Between Reactive Oxygen Species Levels and the Rate of Aging in Caenorhabditis elegans ,” Aging Cell 16, no. 1 (2017): 104–112, 10.1111/acel.12528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Marioni R. E., Belsky D. W., Deary I. J., and Wagner W., “Association of Facial Ageing With DNA Methylation and Epigenetic Age Predictions,” Clinical Epigenetics 10, no. 1 (2018): 140, 10.1186/s13148-018-0572-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Wong Q. Y. A. and Chew F. T., “Defining Skin Aging and Its Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Scientific Reports 11, no. 1 (2021): 22075, 10.1038/s41598-021-01573-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Papaccio F., D'Arino A., Caputo S., and Bellei B., “Focus on the Contribution of Oxidative Stress in Skin Aging,” Antioxidants 11, no. 6 (2022): 1121, 10.3390/antiox11061121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Bocheva G., Slominski R. M., and Slominski A. T., “Environmental Air Pollutants Affecting Skin Functions With Systemic Implications,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 13 (2023): 10502, 10.3390/ijms241310502. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Knaggs H. and Lephart E. D., “Enhancing Skin Anti‐Aging Through Healthy Lifestyle Factors,” Cosmetics 10, no. 5 (2023): 142, 10.3390/cosmetics10050142. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Castro‐Santos L., Lima M. d. O., Pedrosa A. K. P., Serenini R., de Menezes R. C. E., and Longo‐Silva G., “Sleep and Circadian Hygiene Practices Association With Sleep Quality Among Brazilian Adults,” Sleep Medicine: X 6 (2023): 100088, 10.1016/j.sleepx.2023.100088. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Zeng Y., Guo Z., Wu M., Chen F., and Chen L., “Circadian Rhythm Regulates the Function of Immune Cells and Participates in the Development of Tumors,” Cell Death Discovery 10 (2024): 199, 10.1038/s41420-024-01960-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Li Z., Zhang Z., Ren Y., et al., “Aging and Age‐Related Diseases: From Mechanisms to Therapeutic Strategies,” Biogerontology 22, no. 2 (2021): 165–187, 10.1007/s10522-021-09910-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. López‐Gil L., Pascual‐Ahuir A., and Proft M., “Genomic Instability and Epigenetic Changes During Aging,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 18 (2023): 14279, 10.3390/ijms241814279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Wen J. H., He X. H., Feng Z. S., Li D. Y., Tang J. X., and Liu H. F., “Cellular Protein Aggregates: Formation, Biological Effects, and Ways of Elimination,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 10 (2023): 8593, 10.3390/ijms24108593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Cui H., Kong Y., and Zhang H., “Oxidative Stress, Mitochondrial Dysfunction, and Aging,” Journal of Signal Transduction 2012 (2012): 646354, 10.1155/2012/646354. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Haykal D., Cartier H., and Dréno B., “Dermatological Health in the Light of Skin Microbiome Evolution,” Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 23, no. 12 (2024): 3836–3846, 10.1111/jocd.16557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Lee H. J. and Kim M., “Skin Barrier Function and the Microbiome,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23, no. 21 (2022): 13071, 10.3390/ijms232113071. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Chin T., Lee X. E., Ng P. Y., Lee Y., and Dreesen O., “The Role of Cellular Senescence in Skin Aging and Age‐Related Skin Pathologies,” Frontiers in Physiology 14 (2023): 1297637, 10.3389/fphys.2023.1297637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Ferrucci L. and Fabbri E., “Inflammageing: Chronic Inflammation in Ageing, Cardiovascular Disease, and Frailty,” Nature Reviews. Cardiology 15, no. 9 (2018): 505–522, 10.1038/s41569-018-0064-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Boyette L. B. and Tuan R. S., “Adult Stem Cells and Diseases of Aging,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 3, no. 1 (2014): 88–134, 10.3390/jcm3010088. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Baechle J. J., Chen N., Makhijani P., Winer S., Furman D., and Winer D. A., “Chronic Inflammation and the Hallmarks of Aging,” Molecular Metabolism 74 (2023): 101755, 10.1016/j.molmet.2023.101755. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Grootswagers P., Bach D., Biemans Y., et al., “Discovering the Direct Relations Between Nutrients and Epigenetic Ageing,” Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging 28, no. 9 (2024): 100324, 10.1016/j.jnha.2024.100324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Rittié L. and Fisher G. J., “UV‐Light‐Induced Signal Cascades and Skin Aging,” Ageing Research Reviews 1, no. 4 (2002): 705–720, 10.1016/s1568-1637(02)00024-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Ge G., Wang Y., Xu Y., et al., “Induced Skin Aging by Blue‐Light Irradiation in Human Skin Fibroblasts via TGF‐β, JNK and EGFR Pathways,” Journal of Dermatological Science 111, no. 2 (2023): 52–59, 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2023.06.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Grönniger E., Weber B., Heil O., et al., “Aging and Chronic Sun Exposure Cause Distinct Epigenetic Changes in Human Skin,” PLoS Genetics 6, no. 5 (2010): e1000971, 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Holzscheck N., Söhle J., Schläger T., et al., “Concomitant DNA Methylation and Transcriptome Signatures Define Epidermal Responses to Acute Solar UV Radiation,” Scientific Reports 10, no. 1 (2020): 12918, 10.1038/s41598-020-69683-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Acosta‐Rodríguez V. A., Rijo‐Ferreira F., Green C. B., and Takahashi J. S., “Importance of Circadian Timing for Aging and Longevity,” Nature Communications 12, no. 1 (2021): 2862, 10.1038/s41467-021-22922-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Min M., Egli C., and Sivamani R. K., “The Gut and Skin Microbiome and Its Association With Aging Clocks,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 25, no. 13 (2024): 7471, 10.3390/ijms25137471. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Galow A. M. and Peleg S., “How to Slow Down the Ticking Clock: Age‐Associated Epigenetic Alterations and Related Interventions to Extend Life Span,” Cells 11, no. 3 (2022): 468, 10.3390/cells11030468. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Tian S., Liao X., Chen S., Wu Y., and Chen M., “Genetic Association of the Gut Microbiota With Epigenetic Clocks Mediated by Inflammatory Cytokines: A Mendelian Randomization Analysis,” Frontiers in Immunology 15 (2024): 1339722, 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1339722. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Gallo R. L., “Human Skin Is the Largest Epithelial Surface for Interaction With Microbes,” Journal of Investigative Dermatology 137, no. 6 (2017): 1213–1214, 10.1016/j.jid.2016.11.045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Kanherkar R. R., Bhatia‐Dey N., Makarev E., and Csoka A. B., “Cellular Reprogramming for Understanding and Treating Human Disease,” Frontiers in Cell and Development Biology 2 (2014): 67, 10.3389/fcell.2014.00067. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Aguirre M., Escobar M., Forero Amézquita S., et al., “Application of the Yamanaka Transcription Factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c‐Myc From the Laboratory to the Clinic,” Genes 14, no. 9 (2023): 1697, 10.3390/genes14091697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Takahashi K. and Yamanaka S., “Induction of Pluripotent Stem Cells From Mouse Embryonic and Adult Fibroblast Cultures by Defined Factors,” Cell 126, no. 4 (2006): 663–676, 10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Basu A. and Tiwari V. K., “Epigenetic Reprogramming of Cell Identity: Lessons From Development for Regenerative Medicine,” Clinical Epigenetics 13, no. 1 (2021): 144, 10.1186/s13148-021-01131-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Boroni M., Zonari A., Reis de Oliveira C., et al., “Highly Accurate Skin‐Specific Methylome Analysis Algorithm as a Platform to Screen and Validate Therapeutics for Healthy Aging,” Clinical Epigenetics 12, no. 1 (2020): 105, 10.1186/s13148-020-00899-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Winnefeld M. and Lyko F., “Targeting Epigenetic Age to Prevent Cancer,” Nature Reviews Bioengineering 1, no. 7 (2023): 460–461, 10.1038/s44222-023-00046-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Engelbrecht H. R., Merrill S. M., Gladish N., et al., “Sex Differences in Epigenetic Age in Mediterranean High Longevity Regions,” Frontiers in Aging 3 (2022): 1007098, 10.3389/fragi.2022.1007098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Merino M., Tornero‐Aguilera J. F., Rubio‐Zarapuz A., Villanueva‐Tobaldo C. V., Martín‐Rodríguez A., and Clemente‐Suárez V. J., “Body Perceptions and Psychological Well‐Being: A Review of the Impact of Social Media and Physical Measurements on Self‐Esteem and Mental Health With a Focus on Body Image Satisfaction and Its Relationship With Cultural and Gender Factors,” Health 12, no. 14 (2024): 1396, 10.3390/healthcare12141396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Porcheron A., Mauger E., and Russell R., “Aspects of Facial Contrast Decrease With Age and Are Cues for Age Perception,” PLoS One 8, no. 3 (2013): e57985, 10.1371/journal.pone.0057985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Porcheron A., Mauger E., Soppelsa F., et al., “Facial Contrast Is a Cross‐Cultural Cue for Perceiving Age,” Frontiers in Psychology 8 (2017): 1208, 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01208. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Haykal D. and Cartier H., “Unveiling the Psychological and Ethical Journey of Cosmetic Dermatology Procedures,” Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology: JEADV 38 (2023): e180–e181, 10.1111/jdv.19522. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Haykal D., Cartier H., and Boixeda P., “Navigating Laser Treatments for Scars: The Physical and Emotional Journey,” Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 23, no. 11 (2024): 3565–3578, 10.1111/jocd.16572. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Lee J. S., Jaini P. A., and Papa F., “An Epigenetic Perspective on Lifestyle Medicine for Depression: Implications for Primary Care Practice,” American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine 16, no. 1 (2020): 76, 10.1177/1559827620954779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Schiele M. A., Gottschalk M. G., and Domschke K., “The Applied Implications of Epigenetics in Anxiety, Affective and Stress‐Related Disorders ‐ A Review and Synthesis on Psychosocial Stress, Psychotherapy and Prevention,” Clinical Psychology Review 77 (2020): 101830, 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101830. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Cipriano A., Moqri M., Maybury‐Lewis S. Y., et al., “Mechanisms, Pathways and Strategies for Rejuvenation Through Epigenetic Reprogramming,” Nature Aging 4, no. 1 (2023): 14, 10.1038/s43587-023-00539-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Lee L. O., James P., Zevon E. S., et al., “Optimism Is Associated With Exceptional Longevity in 2 Epidemiologic Cohorts of Men and Women,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 116, no. 37 (2019): 18357–18362, 10.1073/pnas.1900712116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Shin S. H., Lee Y. H., Rho N. K., and Park K. Y., “Skin Aging From Mechanisms to Interventions: Focusing on Dermal Aging,” Frontiers in Physiology 14 (2023): 1195272, 10.3389/fphys.2023.1195272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Roche C., Wall P. J., and Lewis D., “Ethics and Diversity in Artificial Intelligence Policies, Strategies and Initiatives,” AI and Ethics 3, no. 4 (2022): 1–21, 10.1007/s43681-022-00218-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. Santaló J. and Berdasco M., “Ethical Implications of Epigenetics in the Era of Personalized Medicine,” Clinical Epigenetics 14, no. 1 (2022): 44, 10.1186/s13148-022-01263-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Landau M., Kassir M., and Goldust M., “AI and Epigenetics: New Approaches to Skin Aging Understanding and Treatment,” International Journal of Dermatology (2024): 17593, 10.1111/ijd.17593. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Lorenzo P. M., Izquierdo A. G., Rodriguez‐Carnero G., et al., “Epigenetic Effects of Healthy Foods and Lifestyle Habits From the Southern European Atlantic Diet Pattern: A Narrative Review,” Advances in Nutrition 13, no. 5 (2022): 1725–1747, 10.1093/advances/nmac038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Orioli D. and Dellambra E., “Epigenetic Regulation of Skin Cells in Natural Aging and Premature Aging Diseases,” Cells 7, no. 12 (2018): 268, 10.3390/cells7120268. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Soto‐Palma C., Niedernhofer L. J., Faulk C. D., and Dong X., “Epigenetics, DNA Damage, and Aging,” Journal of Clinical Investigation 132, no. 16 (2022): e158446, 10.1172/JCI158446. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107. Ji S., Xiong M., Chen H., et al., “Cellular Rejuvenation: Molecular Mechanisms and Potential Therapeutic Interventions for Diseases,” Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 8 (2023): 116, 10.1038/s41392-023-01343-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Mishra S. K., Balendra V., Esposto J., et al., “Therapeutic Antiaging Strategies,” Biomedicine 10, no. 10 (2022): 2515, 10.3390/biomedicines10102515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Dixit S., Kumar A., Srinivasan K., Vincent P. M. D. R., and Krishnan N. R., “Advancing Genome Editing With Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions,” Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 11 (2024): 1335901, 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1335901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Joseph T. M., Mahapatra D. K., Esmaeili A., et al., “Nanoparticles: Taking a Unique Position in Medicine,” Nanomaterials 13, no. 3 (2023): 574, 10.3390/nano13030574. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Plaza‐Diaz J., Izquierdo D., Torres‐Martos Á., Baig A. T., Aguilera C. M., and Ruiz‐Ojeda F. J., “Impact of Physical Activity and Exercise on the Epigenome in Skeletal Muscle and Effects on Systemic Metabolism,” Biomedicine 10, no. 1 (2022): 126, 10.3390/biomedicines10010126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Ma Z., Zuo T., Frey N., and Rangrez A. Y., “A Systematic Framework for Understanding the Microbiome in Human Health and Disease: From Basic Principles to Clinical Translation,” Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 9, no. 1 (2024): 1–36, 10.1038/s41392-024-01946-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting this study's findings are available upon reasonable request.
