4.5 Article

Sub-optimal Application of a High SPF Sunscreen Prevents Epidermal DNA Damage in Vivo

Journal

ACTA DERMATO-VENEREOLOGICA
Volume 98, Issue 9, Pages 880-887

Publisher

ACTA DERMATO-VENEREOLOGICA
DOI: 10.2340/00015555-2992

Keywords

sunscreen; photoprotection; DNA protection; cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers

Categories

Funding

  1. Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmetique
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Facility at Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
  3. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer (CPD) is a potentially mutagenic DNA photolesion that is the basis of most skin cancers. There are no data on DNA protection by sunscreens under typical conditions of use. The study aim was to determine such protection, in phototypes I/II, with representative sunscreen-user application. A very high SPF formulation was applied at 0.75, 1.3 and 2.0 mg/cm(2). Unprotected control skin was exposed to 4 standard erythema doses (SED) of solar simulated UVR, and sunscreen-treated sites to 30 SED. Holiday behaviour was also simulated by UVR exposure for 5 consecutive days. Control skin received 1 SED daily, and sunscreen-treated sites received 15 (all 3 application thicknesses) or 30 (2.0 mg/cm(2)) SED daily. CPD were assessed by quantitative HPLC-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) and semi-quantitative immunostaining. In comparison with unprotected control sites, sunscreen significantly (p <= 0.001-0.05) reduced DNA damage at 1.3 and 2.0 mg/cm(2) in all cases. However, reduction with typical sunscreen use (0.75 mg/cm(2)) was non-significant, with the exception of HPLC-MS/MS data for the 5-day study (p < 0.001). Overall, these results support sunscreen use as a strategy to reduce skin cancer, and demonstrate that public health messages must stress better sunscreen application to get maximal benefit.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available