Sunscreen standards tested with differently filtered solar simulators.

R. Sayre, J. Stanfield, Andrew J. Bush, Dennis L. Lott
{"title":"Sunscreen standards tested with differently filtered solar simulators.","authors":"R. Sayre, J. Stanfield, Andrew J. Bush, Dennis L. Lott","doi":"10.1034/J.1600-0781.2001.170606.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The COLIPA standard for solar simulators permits a range of spectral filtration. Published studies comparing the SPFs of sunscreen formulas show that a range of SPFs is generally expected between laboratories. Specifically, three studies determining the SPFs of sunscreen standards have been performed in a series of laboratories and differences exceeding 50% have been reported. No studies to date have specifically examined potential differences in performance of Standard Sunscreen Test Formulas with varying solar simulator spectra within the permitted range of optical filtration. \n \nMethods: In a paired clinical trial, two SPF standard sunscreen formulas were tested using two solar simulators that complied with the COLIPA standard for solar simulators but were filtered differently. One solar simulator was filtered as supplied by the manufacturer and delivered a high percentage of UVB; the other solar simulator was modified by removing the visible absorbing filter to deliver energy more closely resembling sunlight in the UVA-1 part of the spectrum, with a lower percentage of UVB. \n \nResults and Conclusion: The result was that the SPF of each standard sunscreen was almost 50% greater with the unmodified solar simulator than with the modified solar simulator. In vitro evaluation of the sunscreen standards predicted similar differences due to the spectral differences of the solar simulators, which appears to rule out reciprocity failure. However, reciprocity failure of the control MEDs was observed. The total intensity of the modified lamp was approximately 3 times that of the unmodified lamp.","PeriodicalId":20104,"journal":{"name":"Photodermatology, Photoimmunology and Photomedicine","volume":"56 1","pages":"278-283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Photodermatology, Photoimmunology and Photomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1034/J.1600-0781.2001.170606.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background: The COLIPA standard for solar simulators permits a range of spectral filtration. Published studies comparing the SPFs of sunscreen formulas show that a range of SPFs is generally expected between laboratories. Specifically, three studies determining the SPFs of sunscreen standards have been performed in a series of laboratories and differences exceeding 50% have been reported. No studies to date have specifically examined potential differences in performance of Standard Sunscreen Test Formulas with varying solar simulator spectra within the permitted range of optical filtration. Methods: In a paired clinical trial, two SPF standard sunscreen formulas were tested using two solar simulators that complied with the COLIPA standard for solar simulators but were filtered differently. One solar simulator was filtered as supplied by the manufacturer and delivered a high percentage of UVB; the other solar simulator was modified by removing the visible absorbing filter to deliver energy more closely resembling sunlight in the UVA-1 part of the spectrum, with a lower percentage of UVB. Results and Conclusion: The result was that the SPF of each standard sunscreen was almost 50% greater with the unmodified solar simulator than with the modified solar simulator. In vitro evaluation of the sunscreen standards predicted similar differences due to the spectral differences of the solar simulators, which appears to rule out reciprocity failure. However, reciprocity failure of the control MEDs was observed. The total intensity of the modified lamp was approximately 3 times that of the unmodified lamp.
用不同过滤的太阳模拟器测试防晒霜标准。
背景:COLIPA太阳模拟器标准允许一系列光谱过滤。已发表的比较防晒霜配方spf值的研究表明,实验室之间的spf值范围通常是预期的。具体而言,在一系列实验室中进行了三项确定防晒霜标准spf值的研究,并报告了超过50%的差异。到目前为止,还没有研究专门检查在光学过滤允许范围内,不同太阳模拟器光谱的标准防晒霜测试公式在性能上的潜在差异。方法:在配对临床试验中,使用两种符合COLIPA太阳模拟器标准但过滤方式不同的太阳模拟器测试两种SPF标准防晒霜配方。一个太阳模拟器是由制造商提供过滤,并提供了高百分比的UVB;另一种太阳模拟器经过改进,去掉了可见光吸收滤光片,以更接近于UVA-1光谱部分的阳光能量,而UVB的百分比较低。结果与结论:各标准防晒霜的SPF值均比未改装的太阳模拟器高出近50%。在防晒标准的体外评估中,由于太阳模拟器的光谱差异,预测了类似的差异,这似乎排除了互惠失败。然而,对照药物的互易性失效。改造后的灯的总强度约为未改造灯的3倍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信