Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38899754›Full record

Trial reportSkin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI)2024

Randomised, split-face study of a dermocosmetic cream containing Sphingobioma xenophaga extract and Neurosensine

Enzo Berardesca, Claudia Cartigliani, Margot Nioré, Adriana Bonfigli, Ludivine Canchy, Delphine Kerob, Jerry Tan

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Randomised, split-face study of a dermocosmetic cream containing Sphingobioma xenophaga extract and NeurosensineSkin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2024
    Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Enzo BerardescaPhillip Frost Department of Dermatology, University of Miami, Miami, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3423-5038
Claudia CartiglianiClinical Testing, LabAnalysis, Milano, Italy.
Margot NioréScientific Direction, La Roche-Posay Laboratoire Dermatologique, Levallois-Perret, France.
Adriana BonfigliClinical Testing, LabAnalysis, Milano, Italy.
Ludivine CanchyScientific Direction, La Roche-Posay Laboratoire Dermatologique, Levallois-Perret, France.
Delphine KerobScientific Direction, La Roche-Posay Laboratoire Dermatologique, Levallois-Perret, France.
Jerry TanDepartment of Medicine and Windsor Clinical Research Inc., Western University, Windsor, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin condition associated with erythema, inflammation and skin sensitivity.

objectivesTo assess the benefit of a dermocosmetic cream (DC cream) containing Sphingobioma xenophaga extract and soothing agent in adult females with rosacea-associated erythema and sensitive skin. MATERIALS AND

methodsDuring phase 1, DC was applied twice daily on the randomized half-face and compared to usual-skincare (USC) for 28 days. During phase 2, DC was applied on the full face twice daily for 56 days. Clinical, instrumental and skin sensitivity assessments were performed at all visits; demodex density (standardized skin surface biopsy (SSSB) method) was performed at baseline and D28, quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the stigmatization questionnaire (SQ), Rosacea Quality of Life index (ROSAQoL) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at baseline and D84.

resultsAt D28, a significant benefit of DC over USC was observed for erythema, tightness, burning and stinging (all p ≤ 0.05), erythema measured by chromameter (p < 0.01), corneometry and transepidermal water loss (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.05, respectively), skin sensitivity (p < 0.001) and significant reduction of mean demodex density (p < 0.05) on the DC side. At D84, DC significantly (all p < 0.05) improved clinical signs and symptoms on both sides of the face compared to baseline; SQ, ROSAQoL and DLQI scores improved by 40.4%, 25.0% and 55.7%, respectively compared to baseline. Tolerance was excellent.

conclusionDC significantly improved erythema, skin sensitivity, demodex count, QoL and feeling of stigmatization of subjects with rosacea and is very well tolerated.

Indexed as

ErythemaQuality of LifeRosaceaSkin CreamAdultAgedAnimalsFemaleHumansMiddle Ageddermocosmeticerythemaexternal factorsrosaceasensitive skinskin barrier

Identifiers

PMID38899754
PMCPMC11187799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.