ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Innovative Safe Sunscreens Technology: Evaluation of Skin Penetration Through In Vitro/In Vivo Assays and Environmental Friendliness.
Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Human Skin Platform for Modeling Chronic Inflammation, Environmental Stress, and Therapeutic Intervention.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Innovative Safe Sunscreens Technology: Evaluation of Skin Penetration Through In Vitro/In Vivo Assays and Environmental Friendliness.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional sunscreens can penetrate the skin, potentially causing irritation and raising safety concerns. This study introduces a novel sunscreen technology designed to prevent skin penetration while maintaining high efficacy.
aimsTo evaluate the safety, efficacy, and skin penetration profile of an innovative sunscreen that microencapsulated UV filters (octocrylene and avobenzone) within a silk peptide modified polysilicone-14, and to compare it to a conventional, nonencapsulated formulation.
methodsThe innovative formulation was assessed using a Human Repeated Insult Patch Test (HRIPT) to determine irritation and allergenic potential. Sun protection efficacy was measured in vivo (SPF, PFA). Skin penetration was evaluated using in vitro Franz cell assays with a Strat-M membrane and in vivo via Raman spectroscopy, which measured penetration into the stratum corneum and epidermis over time. Sensory assessment and tolerability were also conducted on volunteers with sensitive skin.
resultsThe HRIPT confirmed the innovative sunscreen was nonirritating and nonallergenic. It demonstrated equivalent sun protection efficacy to the conventional sunscreen, with an SPF of ~30 and PFA of ~10. Crucially, the Franz cell assay showed zero (0.00%) penetration of UV filters for 6 h. Raman spectroscopy confirmed no penetration into the stratum corneum for 4 h and no penetration into the epidermis for 8 h. The formulation was well-tolerated by sensitive skin volunteers. In contrast, the conventional sunscreen showed significant skin penetration and caused irritation.
conclusionsThe innovative microencapsulation technology successfully creates a safe, non-skin-penetrating sunscreen with high UVA/UVB protection. This technology offers a superior safety profile, making it particularly suitable for populations with sensitive skin.
Indexed as
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.