Does topical PDRN work like the injections?
PDRN is made of DNA fragments, often sourced from salmon. Most of the research on it involves getting it into the skin with a needle, either by injection or by microneedling. Creams and serums ask it to get there on its own, and PDRN molecules are much larger than what usually passes through intact skin. New on October 28: a review of clinic skin boosters rated none of the comparative results it found at low risk of bias, which means even the injected evidence is thinner than the marketing suggests. Below are the studies I found, who ran them and what they measured, so you can read the fine print with me.
PDRN serums and creams are often sold with talk of collagen and skin repair, the results people associate with salmon DNA treatments done in a clinic.
Injected
- What was tested
- A polynucleotide (PN) filler, a DNA-based injectable related to PDRN. The paper's summary doesn't name the brand.
- Who ran it
- Dermatologists at Asan Medical Center and Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul
- Design
- Randomized split-face trial. PN filler on one side of the under-eye area, a hyaluronic acid filler on the other, three sessions two weeks apart.
- How it was measured
- Participant and doctor ratings, plus skin elasticity, hydration, roughness, pore volume and dermal density. Ratings were about the same on both sides. The PN side improved more in roughness and pore volume.
- Who paid, and any ties
- Not stated in the summary we could read.
- The paper
- Lee et al., Journal of Dermatological Treatment, 2022
Microneedled
- What was tested
- PDRN Salmon 3%, applied with microneedling. No brand is named.
- Who ran it
- Anti-Aging Medicine program, Universitas Udayana, Indonesia
- Design
- Randomized trial. Microneedling with PDRN compared with microneedling with platelet-rich plasma, two sessions three weeks apart.
- How it was measured
- A wrinkle scale and a hyperpigmentation index. Both groups improved. The PDRN group improved more on wrinkles, with no difference on pigmentation.
- Who paid, and any ties
- Not stated on the journal page.
- The paper
- Vera et al., Aesthetic Medicine, 2025
Topical cream
- What was tested
- A cream with PDRN that was modified in a lab to make the particles smaller
- Who ran it
- Researchers at Ajou University, Korea, with The Anti Aging Lab
- Design
- No comparison group. Women applied the cream twice a day.
- How it was measured
- 3D skin imaging for roughness and a gloss reading. The paper reports less roughness but doesn't give the numbers.
- Who paid, and any ties
- University and government research grants. One author works for The Anti Aging Lab, and the PDRN was supplied by Pharma Food Korea.
- The paper
- Park et al., Pharmaceutics, 2025
New review
- What was tested
- Not one product. A review of clinic skin boosters, including polynucleotides (PN), PDRN, and exosome or secretome preparations, alongside fillers and other treatments.
- Who ran it
- Plastic surgery researchers at Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, with coauthors at VNU University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Hanoi
- Design
- Narrative review. The authors rated the risk of bias of 159 comparative results from published studies.
- How it was measured
- 123 results were rated high risk of bias and 36 had some concerns. None was rated low risk. The only randomized, placebo-controlled trial for PN was a purified PN in acne scars, and the authors say it shouldn't be applied to facial rejuvenation or to other PN or PDRN products. The three randomized reports on exosome-type products paired them with microneedling or radiofrequency, so they don't show the products work on their own.
- Who paid, and any ties
- The funding and conflict of interest statements weren't in the text I could read. Check them on the paper.
- The paper
- Ding et al., International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2026
Why it matters
If a PDRN serum leaves your skin looking better, it's worth asking whether the PDRN is doing it or the hydrating ingredients around it. I'd love to hear what you've noticed.
The story so far
A new review of clinic skin boosters rates none of 159 comparative results at low risk of bias.