Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DOI 10.1007/s00403-009-0974-2
ORIGINAL PAPER
Received: 23 March 2009 / Revised: 29 May 2009 / Accepted: 4 June 2009 / Published online: 20 June 2009
Ó Springer-Verlag 2009
123
604 Arch Dermatol Res (2009) 301:603–608
6 day creams, 8 anti-aging creams, 10 tinted face creams and wavelength before and after irradiation. Depending on the
foundations, 6 self-tanning lotions, 1 skin lightening cream, origin of the tested product, we found different results:
2 anti-redness creams and 2 spot remover creams—all nearly half of the products coming from a perfume store
claiming an SPF between 4 and 30 (Table 1). Polymethyl- did not conform to current legislation on sunscreen prod-
methacrylate (PMMA) plates were purchased from Europ- ucts. The protection provided by these products worked
last (Aubervilliers, France). A previous study has described mainly against UVB radiation. Most often, only narrow-
the protocol [1, 3]. Thirty milligrams of precisely weighed band UVB filters were found in the formula and the most
product were spread across the entire surface (25 cm2) of a common among these (in 80% of the products) was oc-
PMMA plate using a cot-coated finger. After spreading, tylmethoxycinnamate. Nearly half of the products included
15 mg of the product remained on the finger cot. SPF and octocrylene, another narrowband UVB filter, and/or tita-
PF-UVA of the creams were measured in vitro. Three plates nium dioxide which increase effectiveness. It is important
were prepared for each product to be tested and nine mea- to remember that for any of the products which list titanium
surements were taken from each plate. Transmission mea- dioxide as an ingredient, its concentration can be weak—
surements between 290 and 400 nm were taken using a lower than 2%, which translates into an extremely limited
spectrophotometer equipped with an integrating sphere (UV effectiveness. UVA protection is often insufficient and yet
Transmittance Analyzer UV1000S, Labsphere, North Sut- we know that it is UVA radiation which penetrates deeper
ton, USA). The calculations used the following equations: 1 and is probably involved in photoaging [9, 10]. For some
or 2, respectively, for SPF and PF-UVA: time, it has been accepted that only the products able to
X
400 X
400 absorb or reflect UVA radiation are the ones which might
SPF ¼ Ek B k = Ek Bk =MPFk ð1Þ be interesting in terms of sun-induced changes. In vivo
290 290 testing, using the PPD method, determined that only a few
X
400 X
400 of these products demonstrated UVA radiation protection.
PF-UVA ¼ Ek Bk = Ek Bk =MPFk ð2Þ The values were 12, 10, 10, 9, and 8 for the following
320 320 products, respectively, 2, 3, 10, 11, and 18 (Table 2). All
where Ek is the spectral irradiance of terrestrial sun light, the products sold in a pharmacy respected current standards
Bk is the erythemal effectiveness and MPFk is the mean (ratio UVB/UVA B 3 and kc C 370 nm).
monochromatic protection factor [5]. In terms of photoprotection, very few products (8/35, 4
from the perfume store and 4 from the pharmacy) dem-
onstrated photostability (Table 2). By photostability, we
Determining photostability mean that they retained 90% effectiveness (for both UVB
and UVA radiation) after 2 h of exposure to the Suntest.
The plates were exposed for varying lengths of time to a Depending on where a product is purchased, a consumer
solar simulator (Suntest CPS?; Atlas, Moussy le Neuf, may buy a product claiming a certain SPF, and therefore
France) apparatus equipped with a xenon arc lamp may assume photoprotection for the duration they use the
(1,500 W) and special glass filters restricting transmission product, when actually 20% of all products we tested
of light below 290 nm. The temperature of the samples was (7 products of perfumery) did not protect their user from all
kept low and constant using a tap water cooling circuit kinds of ultraviolet radiation (Table 2). They present a ratio
connected to the walls of the reactor. In order to eliminate [3. Furthermore, majority of them (77% of the tested
the turbulence inside the Suntest chamber, we have products) were not photostable according to the conditions
developed a system in our laboratory where the plates are established in a previous study [4].
blocked between two rails and covered with a quartz plate. Furthermore, because of the adverse reactions produced
The light source emission was maintained at 650 W/m2 in by certain filters, such as benzophenone-3, including
accordance to global solar spectral irradiance at sea level allergies [13] and endocrine disturbances at rather high
measured in accordance to CIE. Before and after irradia- concentrations [14], it is important to investigate whether
tion, SPF, PF-UVA, ratio and critical wavelength of the the daily use of these kinds of products is a good idea.
products was measured in vitro according to the protocol How much of the product is applied? The in vivo
previously described [4]. method of determining the effectiveness recommends a
dose of 2 mg/cm2. Studies show that consumers use
much less sunscreen product than recommended and
Results and discussion even more so for foundations and skin care creams [8].
We can assume that users, believing themselves pro-
Results describing all tested products are summarized in tected, may seek sun exposure in the same way they
Table 2. Table includes SPF, PF-UVA, and critical would expect after applying the sunscreen. Finally, in
123
Arch Dermatol Res (2009) 301:603–608 605
123
606 Arch Dermatol Res (2009) 301:603–608
Table 1 continued
No. Trade name (laboratory) Function Composition (filters) SPF labeled
123
Arch Dermatol Res (2009) 301:603–608 607
1 14.40 ± 1.30 3.26 ± 0.17 4.42 353 11.10 ± 0.99 3.12 ± 0.13 3.55 355
2 14.79 ± 0.91 3.15 ± 0.10 4.69 345 9.39 ± 0.69 2.84 ± 0.11 3.31 354
3 8.48 ± 2.74 2.69 ± 0.50 3.15 377 5.55 ± 1.31 1.60 ± 0.14 3.47 377
4 23.90 ± 2.65 6.13 ± 0.62 3.90 367 13.11 ± 1.86 4.93 ± 0.56 2.66 353
5 11.65 ± 1.77 5.27 ± 0.39 2.21 373 11.65 ± 1.77 5.27 ± 0.39 2.21 385
6 28.36 ± 6.83 6.10 ± 1.33 4.64 357 22.48 ± 3.82 5.32 ± 0.49 4.22 358
7 9.40 ± 0.59 5.69 ± 0.35 1.65 385 9.01 ± 0.54 6.13 ± 0.33 1.47 385
8 15.52 ± 3.01 6.55 ± 0.89 2.37 382 13.01 ± 2.10 7.00 ± 0.77 1.86 383
9 7.15 ± 0.86 6.66 ± 0.74 1.07 388 7.67 ± 0.82 7.06 ± 0.71 1.09 388
10 12.69 ± 2.21 8.96 ± 1.21 1.42 379 4.57 ± 0.51 3.22 ± 0.37 1.42 379
11 34.27 ± 8.35 11.87 ± 2.25 2.89 375 3.71 ± 0.69 1.63 ± 0.10 2.28 335
12 10.96 ± 0.90 5.61 ± 0.33 1.95 377 9.50 ± 0.89 5.43 ± 0.36 1.75 377
13 12.24 ± 0.84 2.76 ± 0.08 4.43 340 6.49 ± 0.56 2.41 ± 0.06 2.69 355
14 39.12 ± 6.61 12.47 ± 1.60 3.14 375 10.81 ± 2.02 3.74 ± 0.36 2.89 357
15 11.05 ± 2.56 6.60 ± 1.13 1.67 384 12.93 ± 2.79 7.65 ± 1.21 1.69 385
16 13.07 ± 1.80 4.50 ± 0.40 3.03 374 10.00 ± 2.44 4.23 ± 0.65 2.36 378
17 17.21 ± 4.11 15.04 ± 2.85 1.44 379 14.70 ± 2.90 12.35 ± 2.06 1.19 379
18 14.72 ± 2.34 13.58 ± 1.83 1.08 378 13.32 ± 2.21 11.53 ± 1.68 1.15 378
19 51.21 ± 6.76 19.26 ± 2.16 2.66 377 15.87 ± 1.87 4.80 ± 0.44 3.31 379
20 7.91 ± 0.67 4.95 ± 0.13 1.60 377 2.17 ± 0.14 1.53 ± 0.07 1.42 369
21 20.71 ± 2.69 9.98 ± 1.10 2.07 383 18.54 ± 2.43 10.12 ± 1.10 1.83 383
22 59.75 ± 8.86 22.30 ± 3.12 2.68 377 58.60 ± 7.99 20.99 ± 2.66 2.79 377
23 11.14 ± 1.44 4.89 ± 0.35 2.28 378 7.83 ± 0.77 4.20 ± 0.29 1.86 381
24 17.78 ± 2.92 8.41 ± 1.08 2.11 377 3.56 ± 0.48 1.87 ± 0.11 1.90 360
25 10.29 ± 0.84 3.60 ± 0.12 2.86 373 6.80 ± 0.77 2.92 ± 0.12 2.33 374
26 8.43 ± 2.53 6.35 ± 1.56 1.33 379 5.85 ± 1.66 4.97 ± 1.24 1.18 380
27 11.25 ± 2.85 5.81 ± 0.97 1.94 375 2.12 ± 0.37 1.89 ± 0.32 1.12 378
28 6.33 ± 2.08 3.77 ± 1.20 1.68 373 1.71 ± 0.14 1.29 ± 0.06 1.32 365
29 16.42 ± 3.63 7.98 ± 1.18 2.06 384 11.91 ± 2.12 7.55 ± 1.02 1.58 383
30 16.18 ± 3.00 7.11 ± 1.01 2.28 372 15.05 ± 3.99 6.51 ± 1.05 2.31 372
31 25.22 ± 2.69 12.14 ± 1.03 2.08 377 3.15 ± 0.45 1.65 ± 0.10 1.91 349
32 40.12 ± 6.37 19.92 ± 2.51 2.01 378 4.84 ± 0.81 2.57 ± 0.27 1.88 373
33 24.85 ± 4.21 18.63 ± 2.45 1.33 379 16.87 ± 2.75 12.93 ± 1.74 1.30 379
34 18.18 ± 5.99 11.71 ± 3.05 1.55 378 14.66 ± 5.22 9.80 ± 2.72 1.50 377
35 6.37 ± 0.42 4.83 ± 0.28 1.32 387 6.83 ± 0.51 5.51 ± 0.36 1.24 387
123
608 Arch Dermatol Res (2009) 301:603–608
3. Couteau C, Pommier M, Paparis E, Coiffard LJM (2007) Study of 11. Meunier L (2003) Photoprotection de la cellule de Langherans.
the efficacy of 18 sun filters authorized in European Union tested In: Schmitt D (ed) La cellule de Langherans humaine. Inserm,
in vitro. Pharmazie 62:449–452 Paris, pp 267–278
4. Couteau C, Faure A, Fortin J, Paparis E, Coiffard LJM (2007) 12. Rabe JH, Mamelak AJ, McElgunn PJS, Morison WL, Sauder DN
Study of the photostability of 18 sunscreens in creams by mea- (2006) Photoaging: mechanisms and repair. J Am Acad Dermatol
suring the SPF in vitro. J Pharm Biomed Anal 44:270–273 55:1–19
5. Diffey BL, Robson J (1989) A new substrate to measure sun- 13. Schauder S, Ippen H (1997) Contact and photocontact sensitivity
screen protection factors throughout the ultraviolet spectrum. to sunscreens: review of a 15-year experience and of the litera-
J Soc Cosmet Chem 40:127–133 ture. Contact Derm 37:221–232
6. European Commission (2006) Recommendation on the efficacy 14. Schlumpf M, Cotton B, Conscience M, Haller V, Steinmann B,
of sunscreen products and the claims made relating thereto. Lichensteinger W (2001) In vitro and in vivo estrogenicity of UV
Official Journal of the European Union L265/39, 2006/7647/EC, screens. Environ Health Perspect 109:239–244
pp 39–43 15. Vanquerp V, Rodriguez C, Coiffard C, Coiffard LJM (1999) High-
7. Farmer KC, Naylor MF (1996) Sun exposure, sunscreens, and performance liquid chromatographic method for the comparison of
skin cancer prevention: a year-round concern. Ann Pharmacother the photostability of five sunscreen agents. J Chromatogr A
30:662–673 832:273–277
8. Ferrero L, Pissavini M, Marguerie S, Zastrow L (2003) In vitro 16. Wlaschek M, Tantcheva-Poor I, Naderi L, Ma W, Schneider LA,
determination of sun protection factor. J Cosmet Sci 54:463–466 Razi-Wolf Z (2001) Solar UV irradiation and dermal photoaging.
9. Kligman L (1989) Photoaging: manifestations, prevention, and J Photochem Photobiol B 63:41–51
treatment. Clin Geriatr Med 5:235–251
10. Krutman J (2000) Ultraviolet A radiation-induced biological
effects in human skin: relevance for photoaging and photoder-
matosis. J Dermatol Sci 23:S22–S26
123