4.7 Article

Evaluation of in vivo efficacy of topical formulations containing soybean extract

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
Volume 352, Issue 1-2, Pages 189-196

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2007.10.037

Keywords

antioxidant; isoflavonoid; in vitro retention; stability test; skin; topical formulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present study it was evaluated the: (i) functional stability of the soybean extract as a raw material and dispersed in two different topical formulations, (ii) skin retention using modified Franz diffusion cells, and (iii) in vivo activity of these formulations to inhibit 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA)-induced hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and malondialdehyde (MDA) increases in the skin of hairless mice. The physico-chemical stability was evaluated by pH, globule size and centrifugation test. Furthermore, functional stability was also evaluated by antilipoperoxidative activity. The two topical formulations were stored at 4 degrees C, 30 degrees C/60% RH and 40 degrees C/70% RH for 6 months. The evaluation of the antiperoxidative stability of soybean extract itself and incorporated in formulations did not demonstrate loss of activity by storage at 4 degrees C/6 months. During 6 months of the study in different storage conditions the formulations 1 and 2 added or not with soybean extract were stable to physico-chemical tests. The effect of antioxidant compounds detected by the inhibition of MDA formation was time-dependent for formulation 2 as detected in the skin retention study. Pretreatment with formulation 1 or 2 significantly diminished TPA-induced H2O2 and MDA generation. In conclusion, the present results suggest for the first time that formulations containing soybean extract may be a topical source of antioxidant compounds that decrease oxidative damages of the skin. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available