The output of light delivered at a wavelength of 670nm was calibrated using neutral density filters in order to irradiate cells with a range of fluences encompassing a dose of 670nm light previously shown to be beneficial in vivo (0.3 J/cm2) 20. As the number of neutral density filters in front of the light source increased, the intensity (W/m2) decreased, allowing less light to pass to the target area. Table 1 presents the calibration data of 670nm light generated from the light source fitted with a wavelength filter and includes the number of ND filters used and the intensity of light generated as a result, at described distances from the light output. Fluence, or dose of 670nm light (J/cm2), was calculated from the equation: [Dose (J/cm2) = (Light intensity (W/m2) / 10,000) x time (s)], where the time of treatment was 180s.
| Number of ND filters | Distance from light output (cm) | Intensity (W/m^2) | Dose (J/cm^2) |
| 0 | 10.5 | 20.11 | 0.38 |
| 0 | 14 | 10.55 | 0.19 |
| 1 | 14 | 4.91 | 0.075 |
| 2 | 14 | 2.28 | 0.041 |
| 3 | 14 | 1.03 | 0.018 |
| 4 | 14 | 0.47 | 0.0085 |
| 5 | 14 | 0.21 | 0.0038 |
| 6 | 14 | 0.094 | 0.00169 |
| 7 | 14 | 0.045 | 0.00081 |
| 8 | 14 | 0.021 | 0.000378 |
| 9 | 14 | 0.013 | 0.000234 |
Table 1: Output of the light delivery apparatus fitted with the 670nm wavelength filter.Number of ND filters refers to the number of neutral density filters fitted to the front of the light source output. Intensity (W/m2) refers to the intensity of the light as reported by the propriety software. Fluence, or dose was calculated by the equation[Dose (J/cm2) = (Light intensity (W/m2) / 10,000) x time (s)], where the time of exposure was 180s and distance from the light output was 10.5 or 14 cm.
Two clinically relevant quantal fluences of light were chosen to investigate differential effects of R/NIR-LT wavelength on production of ROS. A dose that can reach CNS tracts following transmission through overlying tissue using LED devices(i.e., 1.78 W/m2 at 670nm) 20 equated to 0.03 J/cm2 for a 3 min treatment, or 4.9 x 1014 photons/cm2/s. The light source equipped with filters to result in emission of 442, 550, 670 or 830nm was then calibrated using combinations of neutral density filters to emit equal quantal outputs (photons) for each wavelength as opposed to energy outputs (J/cm2), and the dosages (J/cm2) and intensities in W/m2 calculated (Table 2a). An additional higher dose that was within the recommended guidelines to stimulate cellular activity 21 was also used (1.29 x 1015 photons/cm2/s), and calibration conducted for each wavelength (Table 2b).
| Wavelength (λ) | Dose (J/cm^2) | Intensity (W/m^2) | Emission (Photons/cm^2/s) |
| 442 | 0.057 | 3.21 | 4.8 x 10^14 |
| 550 | 0.051 | 2.87 | 5.0 x 10^14 |
| 670 | 0.032 | 1.78 | 4.9 x 10^14 |
| 830 | 0.018 | 1.01 | 4.9 x 10^14 |
Table 2: Calibration of intensity of dosage delivered by equal numbers of photons of light at varying wavelengths. Intensity (W/m2), dosage for a 3 min treatment (J/cm2) and emission (photons/cm2/s) when output of xenon light emitting 442, 550, 670 and 830nm are calibrated to emit A) 4.9 x 1014 photons/cm2/s or B) 1.3 x 1015 photons/cm2/s at a distance of 14 cm from the light output.
In order to assess whether the light delivered by the apparatus was toxic to cells at the dosages used, we assessed the protein content remaining in PC12 cell culture wells following the ROS assays, using a colorimetric protein assay. There was no significant loss of protein at any of the higher output dosages of the light (P > 0.05), indicating that the dosage of light delivered was not causing cell death (Figure 2) and is appropriate to use for assessments of oxidative metabolism.

Figure 2: Effect of varying doses of light on the total protein concentration remaining in culture wells following R/NIR-LT and ROS assay. Histogram bars are the mean ± S.E.M protein concentrations in PC12 cell culture wells, 6 replicates / concentration, experiments were repeated 3 times. There were no statistically significant differences between control and any of the treatment groups as determined by analysis of variance (ANOVA), p > 0.05.
We initially assessed the effects of 670nm light, delivered at fluences ranging from 0.0085 to 0.38 J/cm2, as an example wavelength to assess suitability of the light delivery apparatus. No significant effect of 670nm light was observed at any of the fluences tested when assessing either H2O2 or DCF fluorescence in PC12, rMC1 or mixed retinal cells stressed with glutamate (Figure 3, P > 0.05). Similarly, there were no significant effects of varying wavelengths of R/NIR-LT delivered at 4.9 x 1014 photons/cm2/s or 1.3 x 1015 photons/cm2/s on ROS production, when assessing H2O2 or DCF fluorescence (P > 0.05, data not shown). Our ability to detect changes in reactive species is confirmed by an increase in fluorescence of the DCFH-DA reactive dye at 13.44 ± 0.67 mM glutamate to 22.10 ±2.10 at 10mM glutamate. While our data do not reveal positive effects of R/NIR-LT delivered using our light delivery apparatus on ROS production in the selected model system, neither were there negative effects as cells were not compromised, indicated by sustained protein content in culture wells following light therapy (Figure 2). As such, the described method provides a protocol for treating cells or mitochondria with a defined dosage of photons at a range of wavelengths and may be used to assess higher dosages and alternative outcome measures, which may enable optimization of R/NIR-LT parameters.

Figure 3: Quantification of H2O2 (A-C) and DCF (D-F) fluorescence in PC12 (A, D), rMC1 (B, E) or mixed retinal cell (C, F) cultures in the presence of 10mM glutamate stressor, following 670nm irradiation therapy at fluence doses ranging from 0 – 0.38 J/cm2. Histogram bars represent the mean arbitrary fluorescence units / µg protein ± SEM. There were no statistically significant differences between control and any of the treatment groups as determined by ANOVA, p > 0.05, 6 replicates per group, experiments were repeated 3 times.