4.4 Article

Differential Effects of Low-Dose and High-Dose Beta-Carotene Supplementation on the Signs of Photoaging and Type I Procollagen Gene Expression in Human Skin in vivo

期刊

DERMATOLOGY
卷 221, 期 2, 页码 160-171

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000305548

关键词

beta-Carotene; Ageing; Ultraviolet; Wrinkles; Elasticity; Procollagen; Thymine dimer

资金

  1. Korea Food and Drug Administration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Although the photoprotective effects of beta-carotene are thought to originate from its antioxidant properties, some studies documented pro-oxidant effects of beta-carotene. Objective: Our purpose was to determine the effects of 2 different doses of dietary beta-carotene on wrinkles and elasticity, procollagen gene expression and ultraviolet (UV)-induced DNA damage in human skin. Methods: Thirty healthy female subjects over the age of 50 years were randomized and received 2 different doses (30 and 90 mg/day) of beta-carotene for 90 days. The baseline status was used as control. At baseline and completion of the study, facial wrinkles and elasticity were measured objectively. Buttock skin was taken to determine the type I procollagen, matrix metalloproteinase-1 and fibrillin-1 mRNA levels, and UV-induced thymine dimer and 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine formation. Results: beta-Carotene improved facial wrinkles and elasticity significantly only in the low-dose group. The minimal erythema dose decreased significantly only in the high-dose group. Type I procollagen mRNA levels were significantly increased to 4.4 +/- 1.6 times the baseline level only in the low-dose group, and procollagen immunostaining increased accordingly. UV-induced thymine dimer staining was reduced in the low-dose group but tended to increase in the high-dose group. 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine staining was significantly reduced in the low-dose group. Conclusions: 30 mg/day of beta-carotene supplementation is demonstrated to prevent and repair photoaging. Copyright (C) 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据