Saeid Amini-Nik, Robert M Law, Vinay Bhardwaj, Stephen Lynch, Diane B Nelson
{"title":"Protective Effects of an Advanced Antioxidant Serum and an Encapsulated Vitamin C Serum From UV-Induced Erythema and Oxidative Stress.","authors":"Saeid Amini-Nik, Robert M Law, Vinay Bhardwaj, Stephen Lynch, Diane B Nelson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the protective effects of 2 antioxidant products against UV light by assessing UV-induced erythema and skin damage biomarkers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized, controlled trial enrolled 15 healthy women aged 35 to 60 years. Participants' lower backs were marked with 4 test sites (5 cm × 6 cm). Test products (4 mg/cm<sup>2</sup>) were applied daily for 4 days. Untreated/irradiated and naïve sites served as controls. After determining each participant's minimal erythema dose (MED), skin was exposed to UV irradiation at 1× and 2× MED. Erythema, imaging, and skin damage were evaluated. Analysis of markers was determined from biopsies using histochemical imaging and scoring by a dermatopathologist (2× MED site).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pretreatment with the advanced antioxidant serum (TAP) demonstrated 72% (1× MED, <i>P</i>=0.02) and 300% less erythema (2× MED, <i>P</i><0.001) vs an encapsulated vitamin C serum (Encap-C) and 75% (1× MED, <i>P</i>=0.01) and 354% (2× MED, <i>P</i><0.001) vs control. Pretreatment with TAP demonstrated significant protective effects vs Encap-C and control at 1× and 2× MED for matrix metalloproteinase 9 (<i>P</i>=0.004 and <i>P</i>=0.005, respectively), thymine dimers (both <i>P</i><0.001), sunburn cell count (<i>P</i>=0.008 and <i>P</i><0.001, respectively), p53 (<i>P</i><0.001, both), CD68 (<i>P</i>=0.001 and <i>P</i><0.001, respectively), and total lymphocyte count (both <i>P</i><0.001). Encap-C did not demonstrate significant differences in erythema or biomarker levels vs control.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>This study was conducted in healthy participants (mean age: 49 years), with limited representation across Fitzpatrick skin types. Future studies should include a more diverse study population.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pretreatment with TAP demonstrated significantly less UV-induced erythema and provided significantly greater cellular protection vs Encap-C serum and untreated/irradiated skin.</p>","PeriodicalId":53616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology","volume":"19 5","pages":"9-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13372307/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the protective effects of 2 antioxidant products against UV light by assessing UV-induced erythema and skin damage biomarkers.
Methods: A randomized, controlled trial enrolled 15 healthy women aged 35 to 60 years. Participants' lower backs were marked with 4 test sites (5 cm × 6 cm). Test products (4 mg/cm2) were applied daily for 4 days. Untreated/irradiated and naïve sites served as controls. After determining each participant's minimal erythema dose (MED), skin was exposed to UV irradiation at 1× and 2× MED. Erythema, imaging, and skin damage were evaluated. Analysis of markers was determined from biopsies using histochemical imaging and scoring by a dermatopathologist (2× MED site).
Results: Pretreatment with the advanced antioxidant serum (TAP) demonstrated 72% (1× MED, P=0.02) and 300% less erythema (2× MED, P<0.001) vs an encapsulated vitamin C serum (Encap-C) and 75% (1× MED, P=0.01) and 354% (2× MED, P<0.001) vs control. Pretreatment with TAP demonstrated significant protective effects vs Encap-C and control at 1× and 2× MED for matrix metalloproteinase 9 (P=0.004 and P=0.005, respectively), thymine dimers (both P<0.001), sunburn cell count (P=0.008 and P<0.001, respectively), p53 (P<0.001, both), CD68 (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively), and total lymphocyte count (both P<0.001). Encap-C did not demonstrate significant differences in erythema or biomarker levels vs control.
Limitations: This study was conducted in healthy participants (mean age: 49 years), with limited representation across Fitzpatrick skin types. Future studies should include a more diverse study population.
Conclusion: Pretreatment with TAP demonstrated significantly less UV-induced erythema and provided significantly greater cellular protection vs Encap-C serum and untreated/irradiated skin.