Epigenetic Clocks in Skin Aging: From Exposome Drivers to Biomarkers and Therapeutic Interventions

Alejandra DelaO-Escamilla; Samar Khalil; Hassan Galadari; Stefania Guida

doi:10.2147/CCID.S570073

Back to Journals » Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology » Volume 18

Review

Epigenetic Clocks in Skin Aging: From Exposome Drivers to Biomarkers and Therapeutic Interventions

Authors DelaO-Escamilla A, Khalil S , Galadari H , Guida S

Received 24 September 2025

Accepted for publication 14 December 2025

Published 31 December 2025 Volume 2025:18 Pages 3681—3694

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S570073

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Jeffrey Weinberg

Download Article [PDF]

Alejandra DelaO-Escamilla,¹ Samar Khalil,² Hassan Galadari,³ Stefania Guida⁴

¹Department of Dermatology, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico; ²Department of Dermatology, Skin and Scalpel Clinic, Beirut, Lebanon; ³Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates; ⁴School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Dermatology Clinic, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy

Correspondence: Hassan Galadari, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Khalifa Bin Zayed Street, P.O. Box 15551, Tawam, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates, Tel +971-03-7137571, Email [email protected]

Abstract: Skin aging is a multifactorial process driven by a combination of intrinsic genetic programming and extrinsic environmental exposures. Recent advances in epigenetics have illuminated how changes in DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNAs regulate skin aging, with the epigenetic clock emerging as a powerful tool to quantify biological age. This review aims to synthesize current evidence on how environmental and lifestyle factors – particularly ultraviolet radiation, pollution, smoking, diet, and stress – accelerate skin aging through epigenetic mechanisms, while also evaluating the potential of skin-specific epigenetic clocks as biomarkers for early detection of premature aging and for guiding therapeutic interventions. We further discuss the expanding field of epigenetic-targeted therapies in dermatology, encompassing topical agents, energy-based devices, and systemic approaches that may reverse or delay visible signs of cutaneous aging. By integrating insights from molecular biology, environmental science, and clinical dermatology, this review positions skin aging not as an irreversible outcome but as a modifiable, biologically regulated process with promising avenues for personalized prevention and rejuvenation.

Keywords: epigenetic aging, skin rejuvenation, environmental exposome, DNA methylation, therapeutic interventions

Introduction

Skin ageing has shifted from a purely cosmetic preoccupation to a public health issue as life expectancy rises and more than two billion people are projected to be over 60 years old by 2050.¹ Clinically, visible changes such as wrinkles, pigment irregularities, or laxity erode quality of life.^2,3 Still, mechanistically, they reflect deeper molecular damage that accumulates daily with ultraviolet (UV) exposure, air pollution, diet, and lifestyle choices.^4,5 Over the past decade, epigenetic drift, which is the predictable, age-linked alterations in DNA methylation, histone marks, chromatin architecture, and non-coding RNAs,^6,7 has emerged as the crucial conduit through which those external insults are transduced into lasting changes in cutaneous gene expression.^8–10

This epigenetic drift is quantifiable: pan-tissue and skin-specific “epigenetic clocks” translate thousands of methylations shifts into a biological-age read-out that correlates tightly with clinical photoaging scores and systemic morbidities.^11–13 Equally important, drift is no longer viewed as unidirectional; landmark work shows that transient expression of reprogramming factors, small-molecule inhibition of DNA and histone-modifying enzymes, and even clinical interventions such as fractional lasers can partially reset the cutaneous clock without erasing cell identity.^14–16 These findings recast skin ageing as a dynamic and potentially reversible epigenetic program rather than a fixed consequence of somatic mutation.

In recent years, skin epigenetics has advanced rapidly, illustrating how alterations in DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNAs drive visible signs of aging. No longer viewed merely as passive markers of biological decline, these epigenetic changes are increasingly recognized as active contributors to age-related dysfunction in the skin. Therefore, a careful look at current evidence offers crucial insights into both the mechanistic basis of cutaneous aging and the therapeutic potential of targeted epigenetic interventions. Accordingly, this review synthesizes current knowledge on the epigenetic drivers of skin aging, emphasizing environmental factors and therapeutic strategies to clarify how targeted epigenetic interventions could transform future dermatologic care.

Material and Methods

This review was conducted through a comprehensive search of the PubMed database for English-language articles published between 2000 and 2025, using combinations of keywords such as skin aging, epigenetic clock, DNA methylation, histone modification, and epigenetic therapy. Additional relevant references were identified through manual screening of bibliographies from key publications. Studies were included if they examined molecular epigenetic mechanisms, environmental and lifestyle influences on cutaneous aging, or interventions with demonstrated epigenetic or rejuvenating effects in skin.

Results

Epigenetic Mechanisms in Skin Aging

Epigenetic changes drive skin aging by reprogramming gene activity without altering the DNA sequence. These modifications act as molecular switches, silencing regenerative pathways while activating inflammatory and senescent programs. Although DNA methylation is the best-studied layer, skin aging reflects an integrated network of DNA methylation, histone and chromatin remodeling, non-coding RNA regulation, and higher-order three-dimensional (3-D) genome architecture. Appreciating how these layers communicate is essential for designing interventions beyond single-target approaches (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Epigenetic mechanisms underlying skin aging. Skin aging results from coordinated alterations in (A) DNA methylation, (B) histone modifications, and (C) non-coding RNA activity. These changes silence regenerative genes, activate inflammatory and senescence pathways, and reshape chromatin architecture, collectively driving the molecular and functional decline characteristic of aged skin.

DNA Methylation

Epigenetic changes significantly influence skin aging by altering gene expression without DNA sequence mutations. One primary process is DNA methylation, where chemical tags are added or removed at cytosine–phosphate–guanine (CpG) sites. Over time, the skin experiences a general loss of methylation across large genomic areas (global hypomethylation) and localized hypermethylation in specific regulatory regions.^9,17 During natural chronological aging, excessive methylation in CpG islands of genes tied to stem cell function and regeneration can silence these genes, reducing the skin’s regenerative capacity.^8,9,18 Simultaneously, loss of methylation in other regions (eg, repetitive or heterochromatic DNA) can trigger genomic instability and unwanted gene activation. Enzymes such as DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) have been linked to age-related methylation changes,¹⁹ including suppression aging-related loci like p16INK4a and upregulation of age-dependently silenced genes. However, DNMT1 levels naturally decline with age, thus potentially accelerating visible signs of aging.^20,21

Equally relevant is the compensatory rise in ten-eleven translocation (TET) dioxygenase activity that converts 5-methylcytosine to 5-hmC;²² photodamaged epidermis shows a paradoxical global drop in 5-hmC despite heightened local TET recruitment,²³ suggesting substrate depletion rather than enzymatic failure. These observations caution against blanket DNMT inhibition because widespread demethylation without synchronized 5-hmC maintenance can unmask transposable elements and destabilize the genome.²⁴ It remains controversial whether simply reversing focal hypermethylation is sufficient for durable rejuvenation. Partial TET-mediated demethylation can reactivate youth genes, yet may also unmask transposable elements, underscoring the need for locus-specific editing rather than global DNMT inhibition.¹⁸

Histone Modifications and Chromatin/Genome Remodeling

Histones are proteins around which DNA wraps, and post-translational modifications to these proteins further regulate whether genes are active or silent. In youthful skin, enzymes like EZH2²⁵ and BMI1²⁶ maintain tissue regeneration by preserving an optimal histone state. These protective enzymes decline with age, leading to diminished regenerative capacity and senescence. Additionally, sirtuins—particularly SIRT1—help control inflammation and prevent DNA damage,^27,28 but they also decrease during aging, promoting pro-inflammatory pathways and matrix degradation.^29,30 Notably, skin aging driven by environmental factors, especially UV radiation, profoundly affects histone modifications: UV exposure increases the activity of enzymes like p300/CBP that add histone acetyl marks, upregulating collagen-degrading enzymes and inflammation.³¹

Beyond histone marks, chromatin gradually loses compaction, exposing normally silenced genes and promoting genomic instability.^32,33 Aging cells also form senescence-associated heterochromatin foci (SAHF) that lock down proliferation genes.^32,34 Although limited in scale, evidence from Hi-C and Micro-C mapping studies in primary fibroblasts^35–37 suggests a decline in enhancer-promoter looping interactions at extracellular matrix (ECM)-associated loci. These findings parallel observations in progeroid models,³⁷ where disrupted 3D genome architecture coincides with ECM dysregulation and nuclear lamina defects, implying a potential link between spatial genome decay and surface photoaging. Chromatin remodelers like SWI/SNF³⁸ and LSH/HELLS³⁹ coordinate these structural shifts, illustrating why wrinkles, laxity, and delayed wound healing represent local injury and genome-wide architectural decay.

MicroRNAs (miRNAs)

Another layer of regulation emerges from microRNAs (miRNAs), small non-coding RNA molecules that fine-tune gene expression. Intrinsic aging typically involves subtle miRNA shifts, such as downregulation of miR-146a, which correlates with reduced collagen production and increased inflammatory signaling.^40,41 By contrast, UV-induced aging (ie, extrinsic aging) triggers more pronounced miRNA dysregulation, rapidly altering numerous pathways involved in DNA repair, apoptosis, and matrix turnover.⁴² For instance, UV-induced upregulation of miR-34 and miR-23a promotes senescence and collagen breakdown.^4,43,44 These miRNA changes can intensify damage from environmental exposures, making them attractive therapeutic targets for mitigating extrinsic aging. These miRNA changes often lie downstream of chromatin relaxation and histone-variant exchange, underscoring the multilayered nature of cutaneous epigenetics.

Adding another tier of regulation, longer non-coding RNAs, including long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) such as MALAT1 and ANRIL, have been shown to modulate keratinocyte senescence.^45,46 Meanwhile, evidence links circular RNAs (circRNAs) like circ-COL3A1 to UV-induced loss of extracellular matrix components.⁴⁷ Although research in this area is still developing, these findings underscore the increasingly recognized role of diverse non-coding RNAs in the multilayered epigenetic landscape of skin aging.

Environmental Drivers of Epigenetic Aging in Skin

Cutaneous epigenetic drift is highly plastic because the skin sits at the front line of the human exposome: solar radiation, airborne pollutants, tobacco smoke, and lifestyle habits continually deposit molecular scars that accelerate biological age. Unlike intrinsic drift, which accumulates slowly, environmental insults can re-shape the methylome, histone code, chromatin loops, and non-coding RNA networks within hours, leaving durable signatures that translate into wrinkles, laxity, and oncogenic risk (Tables 1 and 2).

Table 1 Epigenetic Changes in the Skin Induced by Environmental Factors

Table 2 Epigenetic Alterations in Dermatological Diseases

Ultraviolet (UV) Radiation

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is recognized as the most potent environmental factor driving epigenetic aging in the skin, exerting a distinct effect on photoaging beyond intrinsic chronological processes.⁴⁸ Chronic UV exposure induces persistent alterations in the epigenetic landscape, marked by extensive global DNA hypomethylation, in contrast to the more moderate promoter hypermethylation observed with chronological aging.^23,29 This widespread hypomethylation predominantly involves heterochromatic regions and likely arises from UV-induced oxidative damage and depletion of methyl-donor substrates, impairing DNA methyltransferase function.⁵⁴ Intriguingly, UV exposure also promotes localized hypermethylation at tumor suppressors and extracellular matrix regulators.^55,83 For example, upregulated DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) following UV exposure hypermethylates the TIMP2 promoter, reducing its expression and allowing unchecked collagen degradation.⁵³ This way, focal epigenetic silencing combines with global hypomethylation, creating a dual mechanism directly linking UV-driven epigenetic dysregulation to structural deterioration and heightened oncogenic risk.^53,83

UV radiation also profoundly alters histone modifications and chromatin structure, collectively reinforcing photoaging pathways.^56,57 Chronic sun exposure increases histone acetylation, often via enhanced histone acetyltransferase (p300) activity and reduced histone deacetylase (HDAC and sirtuin) activity.^31,86,87 These changes correlate with elevated matrix metalloproteinases (eg, MMP1) and pro-inflammatory genes,⁶¹ accelerating collagen breakdown. UV exposure further reduces repressive marks (eg, H3K9 methylation⁶²), causing chromatin relaxation and transcriptional activation of inflammation-related and matrix-remodeling genes. Moreover, UV-driven inflammation perpetuates epigenetic modifications through oxidative stress^23,61,89 and cytokine-dependent epigenetic enzyme modulation.⁶³ Collectively, these UV-induced alterations leave lasting molecular “signatures” on sun-exposed skin, manifesting clinically as accelerated aging and heightened susceptibility to age-related cutaneous disorders.

Pollution and Tobacco Smoke

Pollution and tobacco smoke act similarly to hasten epigenetic aging in the skin, mainly by inducing oxidative stress and inflammation. Particulate matter (PM_2.5), abundant in urban pollution, triggers DNA methylation shifts through downregulation of DNA methyltransferases (DNMT1/3) and upregulation of TET demethylases,⁴⁹ leading to global hypomethylation and activation of senescence genes like CDKN2A (p16INK4A).^50,64 PM_2.5 thus engages the same DNA methylation pathways implicated in aging, revealing overlapping mechanisms.⁶⁵ Concomitant histone modifications—specifically, the loss of H3K27me3 and gain of H3K4me3—reshape chromatin into a pro-senescence, pro-inflammatory configuration.⁵⁰ MicroRNA expression is also perturbed,^58,66 persistently dysregulating inflammation, apoptosis, and stress-response pathways.⁶⁷ Ultimately, these changes accelerate collagen degradation and wrinkle formation,^59,60 cementing pollution’s role in premature skin aging.

Tobacco smoke compounds similar epigenetic disturbances, including persistent DNA hypomethylation at loci such as AHRR, a well-known biomarker of smoking history.^68,69 This hypomethylation can remain even decades after cessation.⁷⁰ Tobacco smoke-induced histone modifications,⁸⁸ such as increased histone acetylation at promoters of inflammatory and extracellular matrix-degrading genes,⁷¹ amplify collagen breakdown and chronic inflammation.⁷⁰ Smoke exposure also alters microRNA profiles, contributing to sustained dysregulation.⁶⁸ Notably, former smokers show elevated epigenetic age acceleration on multiple “clocks,” eg, Horvath’s EAA, Hannum’s EAA, and GrimAge.⁷² Collectively, both pollution and tobacco smoke leave lasting epigenetic scars that drive premature skin aging, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to reduce environmentally induced epigenetic damage.

Other Environmental Contributors

Beyond UV radiation, pollution, and tobacco, various everyday behaviors and exposures likewise imprint lasting epigenetic “scars” on the skin. Diet emerges as a key factor: Mediterranean-style eating patterns rich in antioxidants are linked to more youthful DNA methylation profiles,^77,78 whereas high-sugar diets accelerate epigenetic age.⁷⁹ Mechanistically, poor diets evoke oxidative stress and chronic inflammation, promoting stable DNA methylation changes, histone modifications, and altered microRNA expression.^73,80,90 Advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) can further entrench inflammatory states.⁸⁰ Conversely, nutrient-rich diets supply critical methyl donors and antioxidants, helping preserve a youthful epigenetic landscape.

Alcohol consumption, psychological stress, insufficient sleep, sedentarism, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) also leave cumulative epigenetic marks that hasten skin aging. Chronic alcohol intake accelerates epigenetic age by about 2.22 years.⁷⁴ Prolonged psychological stress activates glucocorticoid receptors,⁹³ driving methylation changes at stress-responsive genes like FKBP5 and impairing skin regeneration.^94,95 Disrupted sleep and circadian rhythms similarly foster aberrant methylation of clock and repair genes,^96,97 eroding the skin’s capacity for timely repair.⁹⁸ Physical inactivity further promotes pro-inflammatory shifts, whereas regular exercise reduces DNA methylation age acceleration, partly via beneficial microRNA modifications.^51,81,82 Lastly, EDCs in plastics, cosmetics, and pesticides subtly but persistently alter the skin’s epigenome and immune function.⁹⁹ Collectively, these factors highlight how lifestyle choices and daily exposures can intensify or alleviate the molecular imprint of aging on the skin.

Current Clinical Interventions and Epigenetic Effects in the Skin

Although the environmental and lifestyle factors discussed can accelerate skin aging via epigenetic dysregulation, emerging therapies suggest that targeted interventions may improve clinical outcomes and reshape the skin’s epigenetic landscape. (Table 3) This section examines conventional anti-aging interventions, newer epigenome-targeted approaches, and senescence-modulating drugs.

Table 3 Epigenetic‑Targeted and Conventional Interventions with Documented Rejuvenating Effects in Human Skin

Conventional Anti-Aging Therapies

Conventional anti-aging interventions, such as retinoids, alpha-hydroxy acids (AHAs), and dermatologic laser resurfacing, are widely used to improve visible signs of skin aging by stimulating collagen synthesis, accelerating epidermal turnover, and supporting fibroblast activity.

Topical Retinoids

Retinoids (eg, tretinoin, retinol) enhance skin texture by activating retinoic acid receptors, increasing collagen, and inhibiting matrix metalloproteinases.¹⁰⁰ Recent studies also hint at a link between retinoid pathways and DNA methylation. For instance, restoring TET2 activity can reverse hypermethylation of the RARβ promoter, enhancing tumor cell sensitivity to retinoic acid in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.¹⁰¹ Moreover, RAR activation dissociates co-repressor complexes (including HDACs), thereby increasing histone acetylation and opening chromatin.¹⁰² Although these findings imply retinoids may modulate DNA methylation in photoaged or diseased skin, their direct impact on healthy human skin remains unclear.¹⁴ Most investigations have focused on retinoid-related gene methylation in pathological contexts, highlighting a need for more research on direct retinoid-induced epigenetic shifts.^103,104

Alpha-Hydroxy Acids

Similarly, alpha-hydroxy acids (eg, glycolic acid, GA) rejuvenate skin primarily through controlled exfoliation and fibroblast activation, boosting collagen production and improving structural integrity.¹⁰⁵ Beyond these effects, GA also displays epigenetic properties, influencing DNA methylation to modulate gene expression. Notably, a 2016 study showed that GA hypermethylates and silences pro-inflammatory genes such as NLRC4, AIM2, and ASC in keratinocytes.^106,107 As a result, inflammatory pathways are repressed, promoting a less inflamed, more youthful phenotype. GA additionally upregulates collagen and hyaluronic acid gene expression in skin biopsies,¹⁰⁸ suppresses UVB-induced MMP-9 activity, and restores aquaporin-3 and collagen levels through epigenetic and MAPK-mediated pathways.¹⁰⁹ GA may support a more youthful skin gene-expression profile by modulating key epigenetic regulators. However, further in vivo research is needed to clarify whether these epigenetic shifts lead to lasting clinical gains.

Laser Resurfacing

Laser resurfacing (ablative and non-ablative, including fractional CO₂ and erbium:YAG) is another standard modality that harnesses wound-healing processes to replace aged skin with new tissue.¹¹⁰ Earlier research concentrated on surface enhancements—reducing wrinkle depth and boosting elasticity—yet more recent studies show that laser treatments can also epigenetically reprogram the skin.^15,111,112 Observed changes include DNA methylation reversion, histone acetylation, and shifts in non-coding RNA expression.^113,114 Laser resurfacing can reset certain epigenetic clocks, reflecting a biological rejuvenation that extends beyond visible outcomes.¹¹⁵ MicroRNA changes post-laser also contribute to anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic effects, fostering orderly tissue remodeling.¹¹¹ This involves chromatin remodeling, notably increased histone acetylation and promoter demethylation of crucial extracellular matrix genes.^111,113 Moreover, combining laser therapy with topical agents such as vismodegib can further modify early carcinogenic lesions, suggesting a synergistic, epigenetically driven boost in therapeutic effectiveness.¹²⁷ Thus, laser-based approaches appear capable of epigenetic reprogramming, offering an opportunity for a more precise anti-aging regimen.

Epigenome-Targeted Approaches

Beyond conventional methods, epigenome-targeted interventions aim to correct age-related epigenetic “errors” at their source. DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibitors have gained attention for their potential to demethylate silenced, youth-associated genes without inducing genomic instability.¹¹⁶ In aged skin cells, global hypomethylation coexists with local hypermethylation of vital regenerative genes.^20,84 By partially inhibiting DNMT activity, researchers attempt to reverse this imbalance, reactivating genes crucial for maintaining a youthful phenotype. Dihydromyricetin (DHM), which is a flavonoid discovered via natural compound screening, directly inhibits DNMT1, shifting thousands of methylation sites toward a “younger” pattern in keratinocytes and restoring multiple “youth genes”.¹¹⁷ Intriguingly, DHM treatment has been shown to reduce the epigenetic age of treated cells by about two years and lower a “wrinkle prediction” score by nearly four years.¹¹⁷ A small clinical study (n=43) reported a 78% reduction in wrinkle volume after four weeks.¹¹⁸ Together, these findings suggest DHM-based DNMT inhibition may counteract epigenetic aging processes rooted in environmental insults, delivering both molecular and clinical youthfulness.

Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibition represents another strategy. In aged skin, loss of HDACs contributes to epigenetic drift—characterized by increased histone acetylation, “silencing” of youth-associated genes, and inflammation.^87,119 Compounds targeting HDACs can restore protective gene expression (eg, antioxidant enzymes, structural proteins) while repressing harmful factors like MMPs and cytokines.¹²⁰ Early human trials using topical HDAC inhibitors (eg, resveratrol) demonstrate improved elasticity, smoothness, and overall appearance, reinforcing the concept of “epigenetic skincare”.¹²¹ Preclinical models further show that HDAC modulation accelerates wound closure, encourages angiogenesis, and fosters a regenerative immune environment.¹²² By remodeling chromatin, HDAC inhibitors enhance cell proliferation/migration and facilitate a pro-healing macrophage phenotype. Emerging selective approaches (eg, HDAC6 inhibition in diabetic wounds¹²³ or dual HDAC/LSD1 inhibition for keratinocyte migration)¹²⁸ exemplify the precise tailoring possible with epigenetic therapies.

Senescence-Targeting Drugs

Because senescent cells accumulate with age and drive chronic inflammation, matrix degradation, and reduced tissue repair via the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP),^91,124 pharmacologically targeting these cells has become a pivotal approach. Senolytics selectively remove senescent cells by exploiting markers like high p16INK4a and p21Cip1/Waf1. Agents such as dasatinib + quercetin and fisetin have demonstrated the ability to reduce pro-inflammatory and matrix-degrading mediators, leading to diminished collagen breakdown and wrinkle formation.^91,125 Meanwhile, senomorphics (eg, rapamycin, OS-01 peptide/Pep14) dampen the harmful SASP without killing the cells, improving DNA repair and preserving overall tissue integrity. Topical rapamycin, for instance, significantly lowered p16INK4a and boosted dermal collagen VII, correlating with fewer wrinkles and a more robust barrier.^126,129 Likewise, OS-01 applied to ex vivo aged human skin reduced p16INK4a, reversed SASP-related gene signatures, and partially reset DNA methylation age.⁹² These outcomes imply that directly targeting senescent cells or their secretory profiles may realign the epigenetic clock and slow, or even partially reverse, the aging trajectory of the skin.

Discussion

Despite the rapid growth of epigenetic research in dermatology, critical questions remain regarding the precise drivers of epigenetic aging, how best to measure it, and how to translate these findings into clinically viable interventions. Recent work reveals that aging skin accumulates aberrant DNA hypermethylation, perturbing genes involved in matrix organization and metabolic balance.¹⁵ Still, unresolved debates persist about whether these epigenetic changes or somatic mutations take precedence as primary aging drivers.⁷⁶ Crucially, the idea that epigenetic alterations are merely correlative is increasingly challenged: a 2023 Epigenome-Wide Mendelian Randomization analysis identified 1299 CpG sites causally influencing perceived facial aging,⁷ while experimental interventions continue to reinforce the functional role of these changes.

Although epigenetic modifications in aging skin are recognized as functionally necessary, there remains uncertainty about their long-term dynamics and causal mechanisms. Most published data are still derived from cross-sectional analyses, which cannot capture the fluidity of epigenetic changes over time. Indeed, a 2023 study tracking 64 individuals for 15 years discovered that most age-associated methylation markers did not follow uniform trajectories, highlighting considerable inter-individual variability and emphasizing the need for longitudinal cohort studies with repeated sampling.⁵² Such variability complicates the development of robust epigenetic clocks or one-size-fits-all interventions.

Another challenge arises from the cellular heterogeneity of skin, including fibroblast subtypes, Langerhans cells, and other specialized populations whose epigenetic signatures can diverge more by developmental origin than by shared environment.^130–133 Bulk tissue profiling can overlook critical cell-type-specific phenomena, such as selective basal stem cell reprogramming in certain inflammatory skin diseases.¹³³ High-resolution, cell-specific epigenomic approaches are thus vital for unraveling local lineage diversity and the mosaic of epigenetic aging within different skin compartments.

Although research on epigenetic interventions (DNMT, HDAC, SIRT modulators, etc.) is advancing rapidly, relatively few rigorous clinical trials have tested these agents specifically for skin aging.⁸⁵ Overall, many compounds for medical applications with a epigenetic mode of action remain in early-phase evaluation, and regulatory timelines for approval are unclear. Targeted drug delivery also poses substantial hurdles: while the skin’s barrier functions protect against environmental insults, they can impede penetration of topically applied agents, raising concerns about off-target availability and systemic toxicity.¹³⁴ Innovations such as nanomedicine-based formulations and other advanced delivery platforms promise to boost local bioavailability while mitigating adverse effects.⁷⁵

Emerging data indicate that epigenetic aging trajectories differ by sex, ethnicity, geography, and even local microbiome composition.^135,136 Hormonal variations, genetic background, diet, hygiene practices, and unique microbial ecosystems shape an individual’s epigenome.¹³⁶ Some skin conditions frequently seen in Western settings appear rare in non-Westernized communities, hinting at microbiome-mediated epigenetic protection.¹³⁷ Integrative “multi-omics” strategies encompassing metagenomics, metabolomics, and epigenomics are needed to clarify how microbial metabolites and environmental factors regulate chromatin states across diverse populations.^135,138

Conclusion

Epigenetic research in human skin aging stands on the precipice of significant breakthroughs but requires overcoming critical hurdles outlined here: mechanistic uncertainties, translational barriers, and challenges posed by sociodemographic variability. Future progress hinges on integrating longitudinal, cell-specific, and ethnically diverse datasets, refining targeted epigenetic therapies through advanced drug delivery systems, and gaining a comprehensive understanding of microbiome-epigenome interactions. By addressing these multifaceted gaps, the field can advance beyond correlations to achieve meaningful, precision-driven clinical outcomes, ultimately redefining therapeutic strategies for age-related skin conditions as well as cosmetic product applications.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Elke Grönniger, Dr. Julia Gallinger, Dr. Steffen Erler, and Dr. Zorica Milinic for providing their valuable expert insights.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

1. World Health Organization. Ageing and health. 2024. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health. Accessed February 27, 2025.

2. Clatici VG, Racoceanu D, Dalle C et al, et al. Perceived age and lifestyle: the specific contributions of seven factors involved in health and beauty. Maedica. 2017;12(3):191–201.

3. Nagae M, Mitsutake T, Sakamoto M. Impact of skin care on body image of aging people: a quasi-randomized pilot trial. Heliyon. 2023;9(2):e13230. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13230

4. Zhang S, Duan E. Fighting against skin aging. Cell Transplant. 2018;27(5):729–738. doi:10.1177/0963689717725755

5. Shin SH, Lee YH, Rho NK, Park KY. Skin aging from mechanisms to interventions: focusing on dermal aging. Front Physiol. 2023;14:1210006. doi:10.3389/fphys.2023.1195272

6. Mangelinck A, Mann C. DNA methylation and histone variants in aging and cancer. Int Rev Cell Mol Biol. 2021;364:1–110. doi:10.1016/bs.ircmb.2021.06.002

7. Vladimir K, Perišić M, Štorga M et al, et al. Epigenetics insights from perceived facial aging. Clin Epigenet. 2023;15(1):. doi:10.1186/s13148-023-01590-x

8. Yuan T, Jiao Y, de Jong S, et al. An integrative multi-scale analysis of the dynamic DNA methylation landscape in aging. PLoS Genet. 2015;11(2):e1004996. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004996

9. Bormann F, Rodríguez-Paredes M, Hagemann S et al, et al. Reduced DNA methylation patterning and transcriptional connectivity define human skin aging. Aging Cell. 2016;15(3):563–571. doi:10.1111/acel.12470

10. Pal S, Tyler JK. Epigenetics and aging. Sci Adv. 2016;2(7):e1600584. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600584

11. Horvath S, Raj K. DNA methylation-based biomarkers and the epigenetic clock theory of ageing. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19(6):371–384. doi:10.1038/s41576-018-0004-3

12. Kabacik S, Lowe D, Fransen L et al, et al. The relationship between epigenetic age and hallmarks of aging in human cells. Nat Aging. 2022;2(6):484–493. doi:10.1038/s43587-022-00220-0

13. Apsley AT, Ye Q, Caspi A, et al. Cross-tissue comparison of epigenetic aging clocks in humans. Aging Cell. 2025;24(1):e14451. doi:10.1111/acel.14451

14. Haykal D, Flament F, Mora P et al, et al. Unlocking longevity in aesthetic dermatology: epigenetics, aging, and personalized care. Int J Dermatol. 2025;64(1):15–27. doi:10.1111/ijd.17725

15. Boreham H. Reverse the age clock: reverse clinical signs of ageing with epigenetic skin science. EMJ Dermatol. 2024;12:30–37. doi:10.33590/emjdermatol/WRLC5248

16. Mitchell W, Goeminne L, Tyshkovskiy A et al, et al. Multi-omics characterization of partial chemical reprogramming reveals evidence of cell rejuvenation. eLife. 2024;12:e93210. doi:10.7554/eLife.90579.3

17. Johnson AA, Akman K, Calimport SRG, et al. The role of DNA methylation in aging, rejuvenation, and age-related disease. Rejuvenation Res. 2012;15(5):483–494. doi:10.1089/rej.2012.1324

18. Grönniger E, Weber B, Heil O, et al. Aging and chronic sun exposure cause distinct epigenetic changes in human skin. PLoS Genet. 2010;6(5):e1000971. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000971

19. Wang B, Du J, Xiao X et al, et al. MicroRNA-217 modulates human skin fibroblast senescence by directly targeting DNA methyltransferase 1. Oncotarget. 2017;8(20):33475–33486. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.16509

20. Xie HF, Liu T, Chen R, et al. miR-377 induces senescence in human skin fibroblasts by targeting DNA methyltransferase 1. Cell Death Dis. 2017;8(3):e2663. doi:10.1038/cddis.2017.75

21. Yi Y, Xie H, Xiao X et al, et al. Ultraviolet A irradiation induces senescence in human dermal fibroblasts by downregulating DNMT1 via ZEB1. Aging. 2018;10(2):212–228. doi:10.18632/aging.101383

22. Tan L, Shi YG. TET family proteins and 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in development and disease. Development. 2012;139(11):1895–1902. doi:10.1242/dev.070771

23. Barnes BM, Shyne A, Gunn DA et al, et al. Epigenetics and ultraviolet radiation: implications for skin ageing and carcinogenesis. Skin Health Dis. 2024;4(6):e321. doi:10.1002/ski2.410

24. Beck MA, Fischer H, Grabner LM et al, et al. DNA hypomethylation leads to cGAS-induced autoinflammation in the epidermis. EMBO J. 2021;40(22):e107161. doi:10.15252/embj.2021108234

25. Ito T, Teo YV, Evans SA, et al. Regulation of cellular senescence by Polycomb chromatin modifiers through distinct DNA damage– and histone methylation–dependent pathways. Cell Rep. 2018;22(13):3480–3492. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.002

26. Lee JY, Yu K-R, Kim H-S et al, et al. BMI1 inhibits senescence and enhances immunomodulatory properties of human mesenchymal stem cells via direct suppression of MKP-1/DUSP1. Aging. 2016;8(8):1670–1689. doi:10.18632/aging.101000

27. Nakahata Y, Kaluzova M, Grimaldi B, et al. The NAD⁺-dependent deacetylase SIRT1 modulates CLOCK-mediated chromatin remodeling and circadian control. Cell. 2008;134(2):329–340. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2008.07.002

28. Imai SI, Guarente L. It takes two to tango: NAD⁺ and sirtuins in aging/longevity control. NP J Aging Mech Dis. 2016;2(1):16017. doi:10.1038/npjamd.2016.17

29. Orioli D, Dellambra E. Epigenetic regulation of skin cells in natural aging and premature aging diseases. Cells. 2018;7(12):268. doi:10.3390/cells7120268

30. García-García VA, Alameda JP, Page A et al, et al. Role of NF-κB in ageing and age-related diseases: lessons from genetically modified mouse models. Cells. 2021;10(8):1906. doi:10.3390/cells10081906

31. Kim MK, Shin MH, Eun HC et al. The role of p300 histone acetyltransferase in UV-induced histone modifications and MMP-1 gene transcription. PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e4864. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004864

32. Liu B, Yip R, Zhou Z. Chromatin remodeling, DNA damage repair and aging. Curr Genomics. 2012;13(7):533–547. doi:10.2174/138920212803251373

33. Shah PP, Donahue G, Otte GL, et al. Lamin B1 depletion in senescent cells triggers large-scale changes in gene expression and the chromatin landscape. Genes Dev. 2013;27(16):1787–1799. doi:10.1101/gad.223834.113

34. Aird KM, Zhang R. Detection of senescence-associated heterochromatin foci (SAHF). Methods Mol Biol. 2013;965:185–196.

35. Sornapudi TR, Yuan L, Braunger JM et al, et al. Remodeling of cytoskeleton, chromatin, and gene expression during mechanical rejuvenation of aged human dermal fibroblasts. Mol Biol Cell. 2025;36(1):ar3. doi:10.1091/mbc.E24-09-0430

36. Mian Y, Wang L, Keikhosravi A et al, et al. Cell type– and transcription-independent spatial proximity between enhancers and promoters. Mol Biol Cell. 2024;35(7):ar79. doi:10.1091/mbc.E24-02-0082

37. San Martin R, Das P, Sanders JT et al, et al. Transcriptional profiling of Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome fibroblasts reveals deficits in mesenchymal stem cell commitment to differentiation. eLife. 2022;11:e81290. doi:10.7554/eLife.81290

38. Dreier MR, De La Serna IL. SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling enzymes in melanoma. Epigenomes. 2022;6(1):10. doi:10.3390/epigenomes6010010

39. De Dieuleveult M, Bizet M, Colin L et al, et al. The chromatin remodeling protein LSH/HELLS regulates the amount and distribution of DNA hydroxymethylation in the genome. Epigenetics. 2022;17(4):422–443. doi:10.1080/15592294.2021.1917152

40. Srivastava A, Karlsson M, Marionnet C et al, et al. Identification of chronological and photoageing-associated microRNAs in human skin. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):241. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-31217-8

41. Stafa K, Rella A, Eagle W et al, et al. miR-146a is a critical target associated with multiple biological pathways of skin aging. Front Physiol. 2024;15:1348765. doi:10.3389/fphys.2024.1291344

42. Syed DN, Khan MI, Shabbir M, Mukhtar H. MicroRNAs in skin response to UV radiation. Curr Drug Targets. 2013;14(10):1128–1134. doi:10.2174/13894501113149990184

43. Blackstone BN, Wilgus TA et al, et al. Skin biomechanics and miRNA expression following chronic UVB irradiation. Adv Wound Care. 2020;9(3):79–89. doi:10.1089/wound.2019.1034

44. Liang X, Zhang C, Shen L, et al. Role of non-coding RNAs in UV-induced radiation effects. Exp Ther Med. 2024;27(6):312. doi:10.3892/etm.2024.12550

45. Ruan L, Mendha YB, Parker E, et al. Long non-coding RNA MALAT1 is depleted with age in skeletal muscle in vivo and MALAT1 silencing increases expression of TGF-β1 in vitro. Front Physiol. 2022;12:774527. doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.742004

46. Abdelmohsen K, Gorospe M. Noncoding RNA control of cellular senescence. Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2015;6(6):615–629. doi:10.1002/wrna.1297

47. Wang L, Si X, Chen S et al, et al. A comprehensive evaluation of skin aging-related circular RNA expression profiles. J Clin Lab Anal. 2021;35(4):e23738. doi:10.1002/jcla.23738

48. Katiyar SK, Singh T et al, et al. Epigenetic Alterations in Ultraviolet Radiation‐Induced Skin Carcinogenesis: Interaction of Bioactive Dietary Components on Epigenetic Targets. Photochemistry and Photobiolog. 2012;88(5):1066–1074 doi:10.1111/j.1751-1097.2011.01020.x.

49. Budden T, Gaudy-Marqueste C, Porter A et al, et al. Ultraviolet light-induced collagen degradation inhibits melanoma invasion. Nature Communications. 2021;12:1. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22953-z

50. Kim HY, Lee DH, Shin MH et al, et al. UV-induced DNA methyltransferase 1 promotes hypermethylation of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 2 in the human skin. J Dermatol Sci. 2018;91(1):19–27. doi:10.1016/j.jdermsci.2018.03.009

51. Ryu YS, Kang KA, Piao, MJ et al, et al. Particulate matter-induced senescence of skin keratinocytes involves oxidative stress-dependent epigenetic modifications. Experimental & Molecular Medicine. 2019;51(9):1–14 doi:10.1038/s12276-019-0305-4.

52. Ito R, Komaki Y, et al. Increased matrix metalloproteinase-1 expression by coexposure to UVA and cigarette sidestream smoke and contribution of histone acetylation. Genes and Environment. 2025;(1): doi:10.1186/s41021-025-00325-z.

53. Santamaria J, Gilaberte Y, Prudkin L et al, et al. a Relevant Exposome Factor in Skin Aging and the Role of Multi-benefit Photoprotection. Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas. 2024;(1):. doi:10.1016/j.ad.2024

54. Cardenas A, Ecker S. Epigenome-wide association study and epigenetic age acceleration associated with cigarette smoking among Costa Rican adults. Scientific Reports. 2022;():. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-08160-w

55. Kenanoglu S, Gokce N, et al. Implication of the Mediterranean diet on the human epigenome. J Prev Med Hyg. 2022;63(2 Suppl 3):e44–e55. doi:10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2022.63.2S3.2746

56. Andreo-Lopez MC., Contreras-Bolívar V., Muñoz-Torres M., et al. Influence of the Mediterranean Diet on Healthy Aging. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023;74:4491. doi:10.3390/ijms24054491

57. Chiu DT, Hamlat EJ, Zhang J, Epel, ES, et al. Essential Nutrients, Added Sugar Intake, and Epigenetic Age in Midlife Black and White Women. JAMA Network Open. 2024, 07 29;7(7):e2422749. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.22749

58. Shen Y, Stanislauskas M, Li G et al, et al. Epigenetic and genetic dissections of UV-induced global gene dysregulation in skin cells through multi-omics analyses. Sci Rep. 2017;():7:42646. doi:10.1038/srep42646

59. Holzcheck N, Söhle J, Schläger T, et al. Concomitant DNA methylation and transcriptome signatures define epidermal responses to acute solar UV radiation. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12918. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-69683-8

60. Ding S, Chen J, Zeng Q, et al. Chronic sun exposure is associated with distinct histone acetylation changes in human skin. Br J DErmatol. 2018;179:1 110–117. doi:10.1111/bjd.16129

61. Beetch M, Harandi‐Zadeh S, Shen K, et al. Dietary antioxidants remodel DNA methylation patterns in chronic disease. British Journal of Pharmacology. 2020;177(6):1382–1408. doi:10.1111/bph.14888

62. Cao C, Xiao Z, Wu Y, Ge, C, et al. Diet and Skin Aging—From the Perspective of Food Nutrition. Nutrients. 2020, 03 24;12(3):870. doi:10.3390/nu12030870

63. Ramos-Lopez O, Milagro Fl, Riezu-Boj, Jl, et al. Epigenetic signatures underlying inflammation: an interplay of nutrition, physical activity, metabolic diseases, and environmental factors for personalized nutrition. Inflammation Researc. 2021, 01 01;70(1):29–49. doi:10.1007/s00011-020-01425-y

64. Luo A, Jung J, Longley M, et al. Epigenetic aging is accelerated in alcohol use disorder and regulated by genetic variation in APOL2. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020;45:2 327–336. doi:10.1038/s41386-019-0500-y

65. Lee CM, Watson REB, Kleyn CE, et al. The impact of perceived stress on skin ageing. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 2020, 01 01;34:1 54–58. doi:10.1111/jdv.15865

66. Zannas AS, et al. Epigenetics as a key link between psychosocial stress and aging: concepts, evidence, mechanisms. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience. 2019, 12 31;21(4):389–396. doi:10.31887/dcns.2019.21.4/azannas

67. Zannas AS, Arloth J, Carrillo-Roa T, et al. Lifetime stress accelerates epigenetic aging in an urban, African American cohort: relevance of glucocorticoid signaling. Genome Biology. 2015;16:1. doi:10.1186/s13059-015-0828-5

68. Carroll JE, Prather AA, et al. Sleep and Biological Aging: A Short Review. Curr Opin Endocr Metab Res. 2021;18():159-164159–164. doi:10.1016/j.coemr.2021.03.021

69. Cedernaes J, Osler ME, Voisin S, et al. Acute Sleep Loss Induces Tissue-Specific Epigenetic and Transcriptional Alterations to Circadian Clock Genes in Men. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2015;100(9):E1255–E1261. doi:10.1210/jc.2015-2284

70. Matsui M, Pelle E, Dong K, et al. Biological Rhythms in the Skin. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2016;17(6):801. doi:10.3390/ijms17060801

71. Fox FAU, Liu D, Breteler MMB, Aziz, NA. Physical activity is associated with slower epigenetic ageing—Findings from the Rhineland study. Aging Cell. 2023;22(6):. doi:10.1111/acel.13828

72. Alegría-Torres JA, Baccarelli A, Bollati V, et al. Epigenetics and Lifestyle. Epigenomics. 2011;3(3):267–277. doi:10.2217/epi.11.22

73. Rajado AT, Silva N, Esteves F et al. How can we modulate aging through nutrition and physical exercise? An epigenetic approach. Aging. 2023;():. doi:10.18632/aging.204668

74. Kumar M, Sarma DK, Shubham S, et al. Environmental Endocrine-Disrupting Chemical Exposure: Role in Non-Communicable Diseases. Frontiers in Public Health. 2020;8():. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.553850

75. Kodal Jb, Kobylecki CJ et al. AHRR hypomethylation, lung function, lung function decline and respiratory symptoms. Eur Respir J. 2018;51(3): doi:10.1183/13993003.01512-2017.

76. Sundar IK, Nevid MZ et al, et al. Cigarette smoke induces distinct histone modifications in lung cells: implications for the pathogenesis of COPD and lung cancer. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(2):982–96 doi:10.1021/pr400998n.

77. Lee Y, Shin MH, Kim MK et al, et al. Increased Histone Acetylation and Decreased Expression of Specific Histone Deacetylases in Ultraviolet-Irradiated and Intrinsically Aged Human Skin In Vivo. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(4):2032. doi:10.3390/ijms22042032

78. Hanai U, Kawabata K, Tsunoda Y, et al. Relationship Between Epidermal Matrix Metalloproteinase-1 and Dermal Collagen Reduction in Skin Subjected to Chronic Sun Exposure. J Clin Med. 2025;14(5):. doi:10.3390/jcm14051433

79. Zhang X, Kluz T, Gesumaria L et al, et al. Solar Simulated Ultraviolet Radiation Induces Global Histone Hypoacetylation in Human Keratinocytes. PLOS ONE. 2016;11(2):e0150175. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150175

80. Zheng X, Swalha AH, et al. The Role of Oxidative Stress in Epigenetic Changes Underlying Autoimmunity. Nutrients. 2022;36(7–9):423–440. doi:10.1089/ars.2021.0066

81. Ansary TM, Hossain MR, Kamiya K, et al. Inflammatory Molecules Associated with Ultraviolet Radiation-Mediated Skin Aging. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(8):3974. doi:10.3390/ijms22083974

82. Gavito-Covarrubias D, Ramírez-Díaz I, Guzmán-Linares J. Epigenetic mechanisms of particulate matter exposure: air pollution and hazards on human health. Frontiers in Genetics. 2024;():. doi:10.3389/fgene.2023.1306600

83. Koenigsberg SH, Chang CJ, Ish J et al, et al. Air pollution and epigenetic aging among Black and White women in the US. Environ Int. 2023;181():108270. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2023.108270

84. Wu M, Jiang M, Ding H et al. Nrf2−/− regulated lung DNA demethylation and CYP2E1 DNA methylation under PM2.5 exposure. Frontiers in Genetics. 2023;14():. doi:10.3389/fgene.2023.1144903

85. Liu C, Guo H, et al. Exposure to airborne PM2.5 suppresses microRNA expression and deregulates target oncogenes that cause neoplastic transformation in NIH3T3 cells. Oncotarget. 2015;6:30 29428–29439 doi:10.18632/oncotarget.5005.

86. Steindal AH, Juzeniene A, Johnsson A et al, et al. Photodegradation of 5-methyltetrahydrofolate: biophysical aspects. Photochem Photobiol. 2006;82(6):1651–5. doi:10.1562/2006-06-09-ra-915

87. Valacchi G, Pambianchi E, Coco S, et al. MicroRNA Alterations Induced in Human Skin by Diesel Fumes, Ozone, and UV Radiation. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2022;12(2):. doi:10.3390/jpm12020176

88. Giammona A, Remedia S, Porro S et al, et al. The biological interplay between air pollutants and miRNAs regulation in cancer. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2024;():. doi:10.3389/fcell.2024.1343385

89. Ding A, Zhao Z. ndoor PM2.5 exposure affects skin aging manifestation in a Chinese population. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-15295-8

90. Blechter B, Cardenas A, Shi J. Household air pollution and epigenetic aging in Xuanwei, China. IEnvironment International. 2023;178():108041. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2023.108041

91. Kaur G, Begum, Thota R et al, et al. A systematic review of smoking-related epigenetic alterations. Archives of Toxicology. 2019;93:10 2715–2740. doi:10.1007/s00204-019-02562-y

92. Joehanes R, Just AC et al, et al. Epigenetic Signatures of Cigarette Smoking. Circulation: Cardiovascular Genetics. 2016;9(5):436–447. doi:10.1161/circgenetics.116.001506

93. Szymański Ł, Skopek R, Palusińska M. Retinoic Acid and Its Derivatives in Skin. Cells. 2020;9(12):2660. doi:10.1111/jdv.15865

94. Zhang X, Cong, Y, Chu, Z et al. Aberrant epigenetic regulation of RARβ by TET2 is involved in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma resistance to retinoic acid. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2022;145():106190. doi:10.1016/j.biocel.2022.106190

95. Vandiver AR, Hogan SR, et al. Aging skin and non-surgical procedures: a basic science overview. Plastic and Aesthetic Research. 2020;7():63. doi:10.20517/2347-9264.2020.159

96. Shutoh M, Oue N, Aung, PP et al. DNA methylation of genes linked with retinoid signaling in gastric carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;7:63. doi:10.20517/2347-9264.2020.159

97. Mizuiri H, Yoshida K, Toge T, et al. DNA methylation of genes linked to retinoid signaling in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: DNA methylation of CRBP1 and TIG1 is associated with tumor stage. Cancer Science. 2005;96(6):571–577. doi:10.1111/j.1349-7006.2005.00082.x

98. Kim SJ, Won YH, et al. The effect of glycolic acid on cultured human skin fibroblasts: cell proliferative effect and increased collagen synthesis. J Dermatol. 1998;25(2):85–9. doi:

99. Tang SC, Yeh JI, Hung SJ, Hsiao, YP, Liu, FT, Yang, JH, et al. Glycolic Acid Silences Inflammasome Complex Genes, NLRC4 and ASC, by Inducing DNA Methylation in HaCaT Cells. DNA Cell Biol. 2016;:. doi:10.1089/dna.2015.2993

100. Hung S-J, Tang S-C, Liao P-Y, Hsiao, Y-P, et al. Photoprotective Potential of Glycolic Acid by Reducing NLRC4 and AIM2 Inflammasome Complex Proteins in UVB Radiation-Induced Normal Human Epidermal Keratinocytes and Mice. DNA and Cell Biology. 2017;36(2):177–187. doi:10.1089/dna.2016.3471

101. Bernstein EF, Lee J, Brown DB, Yu, R, Van Scott, E, et al. Glycolic acid treatment increases type I collagen mRNA and hyaluronic acid content of human skin. Dermatol Surg. 2001;27:5 429–33. doi:10.1046/j.1524-4725.2001.00234.x

102. Tang SC, Tang LC, Liu, CH, Liao, PY, Lai, JC, Yang, JH. Glycolic acid attenuates UVB-induced aquaporin-3, matrix metalloproteinase-9 expression, and collagen degradation in keratinocytes and mouse skin. Biochem J. 2019;476:10 1387–1400. doi:10.1042/bcj20180974

103. Chen R, Liu Z, Zheng H, Wang, M, Wang, B, et al. Efficacy of combining erbium:YAG and fractional CO2 laser for the treatment of facial scarring. Eur J Dermatol. 2022;32(6):770–780. doi:10.1684/ejd.2022.4380

104. Haykal D, Will F, Cartier H, Dahan, S, et al. Epigenetic Modifications and the Role of Medical Lasers in Enhancing Skin Regeneration. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. 2025;24(1):. doi:10.1111/jocd.16780

105. Sherrill JD, Finlay D, Binder, RL. Transcriptomic analysis of human skin wound healing and rejuvenation following ablative fractional laser treatment. PLOS ONE. 2021;16(11):e0260095. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0260095

106. Wang K, Liu H, Hu Q et al, et al. Epigenetic regulation of aging: implications for interventions of aging and diseases. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. 2022;7(1):. doi:10.1038/s41392-022-01211-8

107. Marioni RE, Belsky DW, Deary IJ, Wagner, W, et al. Association of facial ageing with DNA methylation and epigenetic age predictions. Clinical Epigenetics. 2018;10(1):. doi:10.1186/s13148-018-0572-2

108. Garza LA, Sheu M, Kim N et al, et al. Association of Early Clinical Response to Laser Rejuvenation of Photoaged Skin with Increased Lipid Metabolism and Restoration of Skin Barrier Function. J Invest Dermatol. 2023;143(3):374–385.e7. doi:10.1016/j.jid.2022.07.024

109. Pedersen K, Kristian, Hædersdal M, Olesen, H, Uffe, Litman, T, et al. Transcriptomic Analysis of Early‐Stage Basal Cell Carcinomas in Murine Skin Following Topical Treatments With Ablative Fractional Laser and Vismodegib. Experimental Dermatology. 2024;33(10):. doi:10.1111/exd.15187

110. Moulin L, Cenizo V, Antu AN, et al. Methylation of LOXL1 Promoter by DNMT3A in Aged Human Skin Fibroblasts. Rejuvenation Res. 2017;20(2):103–110. doi:10.1089/rej.2016.1832

111. Morgan AE, Davies TJ, Mc Auley MT, et al. The role of DNA methylation in ageing and cancer. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2018;77(4):412–422. doi:10.1017/S0029665118000150

112. 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. 2024;4():. doi:10.3389/fragi.2023.1258184

113. Arrivabene F, Hagens R, Gallinger J, Jaspers S, et al. WRINKLE.AI Novel AI Wrinkle Analysis Based on 3D Data. 2024

114. Warnon C, Bouhjar K, Ninane N, et al. HDAC2 and 7 down-regulation induces senescence in dermal fibroblasts. Aging. 2021;13(14):17978–18005. doi:10.18632/aging.203304

115. Leis K, Pisanko K, Jundziłł A, Mazur, E, Męcińska-Jundziłł, K, Witmanowski, H, et al. Resveratrol as a factor preventing skin aging and affecting its regeneration. Advances in Dermatology and Allergology. 2022;39(3):439–445. doi:10.5114/ada.2022.117547

116. Brinke A, Janssens-Böcker C, Kerscher M, et al. Skin Anti-Aging Benefits of a 2% Resveratrol Emulsion. Journal of Cosmetics, Dermatological Sciences and Applications. 2021;11(2):155–168. doi:10.4236/jcdsa.2021.112015

117. Yu H, Wang Y, Wang D, et al. Landscape of the epigenetic regulation in wound healing. Frontiers in Physiology. 2022;13:. doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.949498

118. Karnam K, Sedmaki K, Sharma, P HDAC6 inhibitor accelerates wound healing by inhibiting tubulin mediated IL-1β secretion in diabetic mice, et al. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis. 2020 1866 11 165903 doi:10.1016/j.bbadis.2020.165903.

119. Kida M, Fatima I, Rozhkova E, et al. Inhibition of the CoREST Repressor Complex Promotes Wound Re-Epithelialization through the Regulation of Keratinocyte Migration. J Invest Dermatol. 2024;144(2):378–386.e2. doi:10.1016/j.jid.2023.07.022

120. Chin T, Lee XE, Ng PY, Dreesen, O, et al. The role of cellular senescence in skin aging and age-related skin pathologies. Frontiers in Physiology. 2023;14():. doi:10.3389/fphys.2023.1297637

121. Konstantinou E, Longange E, Kaya G. Mechanisms of Senescence and Anti-Senescence Strategies in the Skin. Biology. 2024;13(9):647 doi:10.3390/biology13090647.

122. Csekes E, Račková L, et al. Skin Aging, Cellular Senescence and Natural Polyphenols. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22:23 945726 doi:10.3390/ijms222312641.

123. Chung CL, Lawrence I, Hoffman M, et al. Topical rapamycin reduces markers of senescence and aging in human skin: an exploratory, prospective, randomized trial. GeroScience. 2019;41(6):861–869. doi:10.1007/s11357-019-00113-y

124. Zhang L, Pitcher LE, Prahalad, V, Niedernhofer, LJ, Robbins, PD, et al. Targeting cellular senescence with senotherapeutics: senolytics and senomorphics. The FEBS Journal. 2023;290:5 1362–1383 doi:10.1111/febs.16350.

125. Zonari A, Brace LE, Al-Katib, K, et al. Senotherapeutic peptide treatment reduces biological age and senescence burden in human skin models. npj Aging. 2023;9(1): doi:10.1038/s41514-023-00109-1.

126. Koch Z, Li A, Evans DS, Cummings, S, Ideker, T, et al. Somatic mutation as an explanation for epigenetic aging. Nature Aging. 2025;: doi:10.1038/s43587-024-00794-x.

127. Refn MR, Andersen MM, Kampmann M-L, et al. Longitudinal changes and variation in human DNA methylation analysed with the Illumina MethylationEPIC BeadChip assay and their implications on forensic age prediction. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-49064-7

128. Solé-Boldo L, Raddatz G, Schütz S, et al. Single-cell transcriptomes of the human skin reveal age-related loss of fibroblast priming. Communications Biology. 2020;3(1):. doi:10.1038/s42003-020-0922-4

129. Xu Y-P, Qi R-Q, Chen, W-B, et al. Aging affects epidermal Langerhans cell development and function and alters their miRNA gene expression profile. Aging. 2012;4:11 742–754 doi:10.18632/aging.100501.

130. Kundaje A, Meuleman W, Ernst, J, et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes. Nature. 2015;518(7539):317–330. doi:10.1038/nature14248

131. Jin L, Chen Y, Muzaffar, S. Epigenetic switch reshapes epithelial progenitor cell signatures and drives inflammatory pathogenesis in hidradenitis suppurativa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2023;120(49): doi:10.1073/pnas.2315096120.

132. Griazeva ED, Fedoseeva DM, Radion, El, et al. Current Approaches to Epigenetic Therapy. Epigenomes. 2023;7(4):23 doi:10.3390/epigenomes7040023.

133. Zhao L, Chen J, Bai B, et al. Topical drug delivery strategies for enhancing drug effectiveness by skin barriers, drug delivery systems and individualized dosing. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2024;14():. doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1333986

134. Li T, Chen Y, Li, S, et al. The Advances in the Development of Epigenetic Modifications Therapeutic Drugs Delivery Systems. International Journal of Nanomedicine. 2024;19():10623–10637 doi:10.2147/ijn.s480095.

135. Smythe P, Wilkinson, HN. The Skin Microbiome: Current Landscape and Future Opportunities. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023;24(4):39503950 doi:10.3390/ijms24043950.

136. Schommer NN, Gallo RL, et al. Structure and function of the human skin microbiome. Trends in Microbiology. 2013;21(12):660–668. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2013.10.001

137. De Pessemier B, Grine L, Debaere, M, Maes, A, Paetzold, B, Callewaert, C, et al. Gut–Skin Axis: Current Knowledge of the Interrelationship between Microbial Dysbiosis and Skin Conditions. Microorganisms. 2021;9(2):353 doi:10.3390/microorganisms9020353.

138. Rusiñol L, Puig L, et al. Multi-Omics Approach to Improved Diagnosis and Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis and Psoriasis. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;25(2):1042 doi:10.3390/ijms25021042.

Creative Commons License © 2025 The Author(s). This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, 4.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]