ArticleChemistry Central journal2012
Chemical consequences of cutaneous photoageing.
Article in Chemistry Central journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skin rejuvenation using cosmetic products containing growth factors, cytokines, and matrikines: a review of the literature.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2016Review
- A potential role for endogenous proteins as sacrificial sunscreens and antioxidants in human tissues.Redox biology · 2015Article
- Production of a Novel Mineral-based Sun Lotion for Protecting the Skin from Biohazards of Electromagnetic Radiation in the UV Region.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2014Article
- Herbal products as skincare therapeutic agents against ultraviolet radiation-induced skin disorders.Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human skin, in common with other organs, ages as a consequence of the passage of time, but in areas exposed to solar ultraviolet radiation, the effects of this intrinsic ageing process are exacerbated. In particular, both the severity and speed of onset of age-related changes, such as wrinkle formation and loss of elasticity, are enhanced in photoaged (also termed extrinsically aged) as compared with aged, photoprotected, skin. The anatomy of skin is characterised by two major layers: an outer, avascular, yet highly cellular and dynamic epidermis and an underlying vascularised, comparatively static and cell-poor, dermis. The structural consequences of photoageing are mainly evident in the extracellular matrix-rich but cell-poor dermis where key extracellular matrix proteins are particularly susceptible to photodamage. Most investigations to date have concentrated on the cell as both a target for and mediator of, ultraviolet radiation-induced photoageing. As the main effectors of dermal remodelling produced by cells (extracellular proteases) generally have low substrate specificity, we recently suggested that the differential susceptibility of key extracellular matrix proteins to the processes of photoageing may be due to direct, as opposed to cell-mediated, photodamage.In this review, we discuss the experimental evidence for ultraviolet radiation (and related reactive oxygen species)-mediated differential degradation of normally long lived dermal proteins including the fibrillar collagens, elastic fibre components, glycoproteins and proteoglycans. Whilst these components exhibit highly diverse primary and hence macro- and supra-molecular structures, we present evidence that amino acid composition alone may be a useful predictor of age-related protein degradation in both photoexposed and, as a consequence of differential oxidation sensitivity, photoprotected, tissues.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.