Sunscreens: photoprotection of non-erythema endpoints relevant to skin cancer

Redefine photoprotection: Sun protection beyond sunburn

Excessive exposure to ultraviolet (UV) light leads to acute and chronic UV damage and is the main risk factor for the development of skin cancer. In most countries with western lifestyle, the topical application of sunscreens on UV-exposed skin areas is by far the most frequently used preventive measure against sunburn. Further than preventing sunburns, increasing numbers of consumers are appreciating sunscreens with a medium- to high-level sun protective factor (SPF) as basis for sustainable-skin ageing or skin cancer prevention programs. However, recent investigations indicate that clinically significant DNA damages as well as a lasting impairment of cutaneous immunosurveillance already occur far below the standard of one minimal erythema dose (MED) sunburn level, which contributes to the current discussion of the clinical value of high-protective SPF values. Ex vivo investigations on human skin showed that the application of SPF30 reduces DNA damage for a day long sun exposure (24 MED) drastically by about 53% but is significantly surpassed by SPF100 reducing DNA damage by approx. 73%. Further analysis on different SPF protection levels in UV-exposed cell culture assays focusing on IL-18, cell vitality and cis/trans-urocanic acid support these findings. Whereas SPF30 and SPF50+ sunscreens already offer a solid UVB cover for most indications, our results indicate that SPF100 provides significant additional protection against mutagenic (non-apoptotic-) DNA damage and functional impairment of the cutaneous immunosurveillance and therefore qualifies as an optimized sunscreen for specifically vulnerable patient groups such as immunosuppressed patients, or skin cancer patients.

Polyhydroxylated fatty alcohols derived from avocado suppress inflammatory response and provide non-sunscreen protection against UV-induced damage in skin cells

Exposing skin to ultraviolet (UV) radiation contributes to photoaging and to the development of skin cancer by DNA lesions and triggering inflammatory and other harmful cellular cascades. The present study tested the ability of unique lipid molecules, polyhydroxylated fatty alcohols (PFA), extracted from avocado, to reduce UVB-induced damage and inflammation in skin. Introducing PFA to keratinocytes prior to their exposure to UVB exerted a protective effect, increasing cell viability, decreasing the secretion of IL-6 and PGE(2), and enhancing DNA repair. In human skin explants, treating with PFA reduced significantly UV-induced cellular damage. These results support the idea that PFA can play an important role as a photo-protective agent in UV-induced skin damage.

Broad-spectrum sunscreens provide better protection from solar ultraviolet-simulated radiation and natural sunlight-induced immunosuppression in human beings

BACKGROUND

It is well established that ultraviolet (UV) radiation induces immunomodulatory effects that may be involved in skin cancer. Recent studies have shown that UVA (320-400 nm) and UVB (290-320 nm) radiation are immunosuppressive. As a result, sunscreens, which mainly absorb UVB, may be less effective in preventing UV radiation-induced immunosuppression than broad-spectrum products.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to study the effects of UVA exposure on human delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) response and compare the efficacy of sunscreens having different levels of sun-protection factor (SPF) and UVA protection against both solar-simulated radiation and outdoor real-life sunlight exposure conditions.

METHODS

DTH was assessed using a kit which includes 7 recall antigens that most of the participants encountered during childhood immunization. Evaluation of DTH test response was made 48 hours after test application before and after UV exposure with or without sunscreens.

RESULTS

In unprotected participants, the response to DTH tests was significantly reduced irrespective of UV types of exposure (full-spectrum UVA, long UVA, solar-simulated radiation). A UVB sunscreen failed to protect from solar-simulated radiation-induced immunosuppression. In contrast, a broad-spectrum sunscreen with the same SPF but providing a high protection in the UVA range significantly reduced local UV-induced immunosuppression and prevented the distant effects. In the outdoor study, as compared with DTH responses obtained before sun exposure, no alteration of immune response was detected when the skin was protected by a broad-spectrum sunscreen having a high protection level in the UVA (SPF 25, UVA protection factor 14). Conversely a broad-spectrum sunscreen with lower protection against UVA (SPF 25, UVA protection factor 6) failed to prevent UV-impaired response.

LIMITATIONS

These results have been obtained after repeated exposure. Additional experiments obtained under acute exposure are in progress.

CONCLUSION

These findings clearly demonstrated the role of UVA in the induction of photoimmunosuppression together with the need for sunscreen products providing efficient photoprotection throughout the entire UV spectrum.

Immune Protection Factors of Chemical Sunscreens Measured in the Local Contact Hypersensitivity Model in Humans

We conducted a randomized trial designed to calculate human in vivo immune protection factors of two sunscreen preparations in a model of ultraviolet-induced local suppression of the induction of contact hypersensitivity to 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene. Seventy-five male subjects were exposed in a multistage study to multiples of their individual minimal erythema dose of solar-simulated ultraviolet radiation with or without protection by an ultraviolet B sunscreen (sun protection factor 5.2) or a broad-spectrum ultraviolet A + B sunscreen (sun protection factor 6.2). After 24 h subjects were sensitized with 50 microL of 0.0625% 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene on a nonirradiated or ultraviolet-irradiated field on the buttock that was unprotected or protected by sunscreen. Three weeks after sensitization the subjects were challenged with varying concentrations of 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene on their upper inner arm, and the contact hypersensitivity response was determined at 48 and 72 h based on a semiquantitative clinical score, contact hypersensitivity lesion diameters, and dermal skin edema measurement by 20 MHz ultrasound. The 50% immunosuppressive dose ranged from 0.63 to 0.79 minimal erythema dose, depending on the endpoint parameter. Both sunscreens offered significant immunoprotection (p = 0.014-0.002) and their immune protection factor ranged from 4.5 to 5.8 (ultraviolet B sunscreen) and from 7.7 to 11 (ultraviolet A + B sunscreen). The immune protection factor of the ultraviolet B sunscreen was similar to the sun protection factor (5.2), whereas the sunscreen with broad-spectrum ultraviolet A + B protection exhibited better immunoprotective capacity than predicted from the sun protection factor.

Prevention of immunosuppression by sunscreens in humans is unrelated to protection from erythema and dependent on protection from ultraviolet a in the face of constant ultraviolet B protection

Sunscreens have been advocated as an important means of preventing skin cancer. Ultraviolet radiation induced immunosuppression is recognized as an important event in skin cancer development, yet the effectiveness of sunscreens in protecting the human immune system from ultraviolet radiation (i.e. ultraviolet radiation) is still unclear. The only currently accepted method of sunscreen rating is the sun protection factor system based on the prevention of erythema. We determined immune protection factors for six commercially available sunscreens using a nickel contact hypersensitivity model in humans. Both sun protection factor and immune protection factor testing was performed using the same solar simulated ultraviolet radiation source and dose-responses were used to determine endpoints both with and without sunscreens. We found that the immune protection factor did not correlate with the sun protection factor; however, immune protection factor was significantly correlated to the ultraviolet A protective capability of the sunscreens, indicating that sunscreen protection from ultraviolet A is important for the prevention of ultraviolet immunosuppression, when there is constant ultraviolet B protection. We recommend that sunscreens should be rated against their immune protective capability to provide a better indication of their ability to protect against skin cancer.

Effects of UVA radiation on an established immune response in humans and sunscreen efficacy

It is well established that ultraviolet radiation has immunomodulatory effects which may be involved in skin cancer. Recent studies have shown that UVA radiation (320-400 nm) as well as UVB (290-320 nm) is immunosuppressive. This means that sunscreens which mainly absorb UVB (protection against erythema) may be less effective in preventing UVR-induced immunosuppression than broad-spectrum products. We have studied the effects of UVA exposure on the human delayed-type hypersensitivity response (DTH) and compared the efficacy of sunscreens having different levels of UVA protection under both solar-simulated radiation (SSR) chronic exposures or acute exposure and outdoor real-life solar exposure conditions. DTH was assessed using recall antigens. Our studies clearly demonstrate the role of UVA in the induction of photoimmunosuppression together with the need for sunscreen products providing efficient photoprotection throughout the entire UV spectrum. These data suggest that sun protection factor may not be sufficient to predict the ability of sunscreens for protection from UV-induced immune suppression. Determining the level of UVA protection is particularly necessary, because UVA seems to have a relatively low contribution to erythema but is highly involved in immunosuppression.

A commercial sunscreen's protection against ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression is more than 50% lower than protection against sunburn in humans

Ultraviolet radiation (280-400 nm)-induced suppression of cutaneous cell-mediated immunity plays an important part in the development of skin cancer. Sunscreens are widely advocated to protect against skin cancer but if they offer insufficient protection against immunosuppression they may inadvertently increase skin cancer risk. This human study evaluated immunoprotection afforded by a commercial sunscreen preparation (labeled sun protection factor 15) offering primarily ultraviolet B (280-320 nm) protection. Indirectly, it also investigated whether ultraviolet A (320-400 nm) plays a part in ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression. Healthy white-skinned volunteers were used (n=119). Ultraviolet radiation exposures were on previously unexposed buttock skin with an ultraviolet radiation source that complied with European recommendations for sunscreen testing. Ultraviolet radiation dose-response curves for sunburn/erythema and suppression of the contact hypersensitivity response were generated either with or without sunscreen in vivo and protection factors were derived for both end-points. The ultraviolet radiation wavelengths transmitted by the sunscreen were determined in vitro and showed that the sunscreen was primarily an ultraviolet B absorber, with relatively poor absorption in the ultraviolet A region. The sun-screen protected against both erythema and immunosuppression but protection against immunosuppression (IPF=4.9, 95% confidence interval: 2.3-10.6) was less than half that for erythema (Ery-PFg=14.2, 95% confidence interval: 10.2-19.8). Failure of the sunscreen to afford comparable protection against both end-points was probably due to immunosuppression by ultraviolet A, a part of the solar spectrum that does not readily cause sunburn. The sunscreen protected against both end-points, which supports the use of sunscreens to reduce immunosuppression but protection against immunosuppression may be improved if sunscreens are formulated to offer equivalent protection against ultraviolet B and ultraviolet A.

Broad-spectrum sunscreens provide better protection from the suppression of the elicitation phase of delayed-type hypersensitivity response in humans

It is well established that ultraviolet radiation has immunomodulatory effects that may be involved in skin cancer. Recent studies have shown that ultraviolet A radiation (320-400 nm) as well as ultraviolet B (290-320 nm) is immunosuppressive. This means sunscreens that mainly absorb ultraviolet B (protection against erythema) may be less effective in preventing ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression than broad-spectrum products. We have studied the effects of ultraviolet A exposure on the human delayed-type hypersensitivity response and compared the efficacy of sunscreens having different levels of ultraviolet A protection under both solar-simulated radiation and outdoor real-life solar exposure conditions. Delayed-type hypersensitivity was assessed using recall antigens. In a first study, two groups of volunteers were exposed to ultraviolet A (either full spectrum ultraviolet A or ultraviolet A1) without prior application of sunscreen and they were shown to exhibit significantly reduced delayed-type hypersensitivity responses. In order to compare the efficacy of sunscreens in preventing photoimmunosuppression, three groups of subjects received 10 cumulative exposures to solar-simulated radiation; one group was exposed unprotected and the other two were exposed after being applied either a ultraviolet B or a broad-spectrum sunscreen, each with the same sun protection factor 9, but with different ultraviolet A protection factors 9 and 2. Then, an outdoor study was conducted in which delayed-type hypersensitivity was assessed before and after six daily exposures. Two different groups of subjects were treated with one of two sunscreens having the same sun protection factor 25 but different ultraviolet A-protection factors. In unprotected volunteers, responses to delayed-type hypersensitivity tests were significantly reduced irrespective of ultraviolet exposure conditions (full spectrum ultraviolet A, ultraviolet A1, solar-simulated radiation). The ultraviolet B sunscreen failed to protect from solar- simulated radiation-induced immunosuppression. In contrast, the broad-spectrum sunscreen having the same sun protection factor but providing high protection in the ultraviolet A range significantly reduced local ultraviolet-induced immunosuppression and prevented the distal effects. In the outdoor study, as compared with delayed-type hypersensitivity responses obtained before sun exposure, no alteration of immune response was detected when the skin was protected by broad-spectrum sunscreen sun protection factor 25 and ultraviolet A-protection factor 14. Conversely, a broad-spectrum sunscreen sun protection factor 25 ultraviolet A-protection factor 6 failed to protect against the sun-impaired response. The above studies clearly demonstrate the role of ultraviolet A in the induction of photoimmunosuppression together with the need for sunscreen products providing efficient photoprotection throughout the entire ultraviolet spectrum.

Effects of solar-simulated radiation dose fractionation on CD1a+ Langerhans cells and CD11b+ macrophages in human skin

BACKGROUND

There are few human studies investigating the immunosuppressive effects of exposure to solar-simulated radiation (SSR) and its relationship with sunburn/erythema, and few comparative data on the importance of SSR exposure regimens.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether SSR-induced erythema is a reliable end-point for assessing damage to antigen-presenting cells (APCs) in human skin.

METHODS

We compared the relationship between SSR-induced erythema and alterations in epidermal CD1a+ Langerhans cells (LCs) and CD11b+ macrophages in human volunteers after single exposures to 0, 0.5, 1, 2 or 3 minimal erythema doses (MED). We also investigated whether SSR exposure leads to an accumulation or accommodation of the same end-points by comparing the effects of a relatively low cumulative SSR dose (3 MED) given in varying daily dose fractions (4 x 0.75 MED, 2 x 1.5 MED and 1 x 3 MED).

RESULTS

Single SSR exposures induced a dose-dependent increase in erythema. CD1a+ LCs remaining in the irradiated epidermis showed a dose-dependent increase in cell size and altered morphology. Significant depletion of CD1a+ LCs and presence of CD11b+ macrophages only occurred in sites irradiated with 2 MED and 3 MED. Dose fractionation had no effect on the final erythemal response but the 4 x 0.75 MED and 1 x 3 MED protocols were better tolerated than 2 x 1.5 MED for alterations in CD1a+ LC and CD11b+ cell numbers. In contrast, dose fractionation protected against alterations in CD1a+ LC morphology or cell size.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that erythema is a poor indicator of alterations in epidermal APCs and that dose fractionation is an important parameter in the immunological effects of ultraviolet radiation.

Change of ultraviolet absorbance of sunscreens by exposure to solar-simulated radiation

Regarding the outdoor behavior of the Caucasian population, modern sunscreens should provide high and broad-spectrum ultraviolet protection in the ultraviolet B as well as in the ultraviolet A range and should be photochemically stable for ultraviolet doses, which can be expected in solar radiation. At present an assessment of the photostability of suncare products is not a general requirement before marketing. In order to evaluate the photostability of suncare products we conducted an in vitro test and measured the spectral absorbance of 16 sunscreens before, and after exposure to increasing biologically weighted standard erythema doses (5, 12.5, 25, 50) of solar-simulated radiation. Seven of 16 suncare products showed a significant dose- and wavelength-dependent decrease of the ultraviolet A protective capacity, whereas the ability to absorb ultraviolet B was not affected. In the ultraviolet A range, the decrease of absorbance (photoinactivation), respectively, the increase of transmission was 12-48% for an ultraviolet exposure of 25 standard erythema dose. Photoinactivation started in the wavelength range between 320 and 335 nm with a maximum above 350 nm. Furthermore, our analysis showed that the behavior of suncare products was not predictable from its individual ingredients. Neither complex combinations of organic filters nor addition of inorganic filters could absolutely prevent photoinactivation. The inclusion of a single photounstable filter did not mean photoinstability of the complete suncare product. Photoinactivation of sunscreens appears to be an underestimated hazard to the skin, first, by formation of free radicals, second, by increased ultraviolet A transmission.