Photoprotection by clothing: A review

Probiotics and Prebiotics Orally Assumed as Disease Modifiers for Stable Mild Atopic Dermatitis: An Italian Real-Life, Multicenter, Retrospective, Observational Study

The role of the skin-gut axis in atopic dermatitis (AD) remains a subject of debate, limiting non-pharmacological interventions such as probiotics and prebiotics. To improve understanding of their potential as a monotherapy for stable mild cases, we conducted a real-life, multicenter, retrospective observational study in Italy. We administered three selected bacteria (Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BS01, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum LP14, and Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus LR05) orally to patients with mild atopic dermatitis without a placebo control group, following up for 12 weeks. Clinical assessments using the Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), and Three-Item Severity (TIS) score were conducted on 144 enrolled patients (average age: 25.1 ± 17.6 years). Notably, both pruritus and AD-related lesions (erythema, edema/papules, excoriation) exhibited significant clinical and statistical improvement (p < 0.001) after 12 weeks of exclusive probiotic and prebiotic use. These preliminary results suggest a potential link between the skin-gut microbiome and support the rationale for using specific probiotics and prebiotics in mild AD, even for maintenance, to reduce flares and dysbiosis.

A multicenter case-control study comparing sun exposure habits and use of photoprotection measures in patients diagnosed with different types of skin cancer

BACKGROUND

While skin cancer awareness programs have significantly furthered public understanding about the harmful effects of the sun, there is a disparity between photoprotection knowledge and protection practices.

OBJECTIVE

To compare sun exposure habits and photoprotection measures in patients diagnosed with basal cell carcinoma (BCC), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and melanoma versus controls.

METHODS

Multicentre case-control observational study carried out by 13 Spanish dermatologists between April 2020 and August 2022. Patients diagnosed with BCC, SCC, or melanoma were considered cases. The control group consisted of individuals with no history of skin cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 254 cases (56.2% female; mean age, 62.67 ± 15.65), 119 (31.2%) had BCC, 62 (16.27%) SCC, and 73 (19.1%) melanoma. The control group consisted of 127 (33.33%) individuals. Avoiding sun exposure between 12:00 and 16:00 was the most commonly used photoprotection measure (habitually/always: 63.1%), followed by the use of sunscreen (habitually/always: 58.9%). Patients with melanoma were less likely to use clothing and shade to avoid sun exposure (p < .05), whereas those with BCC and SCC reported greater use of head coverings (p = .01). BCC and SCC groups reported greater sun exposure 15 years prior, whereas controls reported greater use of sunscreen. However, at the time of this study all groups reported using SPF ≥ 21, and the majority SPF > 50. No differences were observed in photoprotection measures between people with and without a previous history of skin cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe differences in photoprotection measures and sun exposure patterns among patients diagnosed with different skin tumor types. Whether these differences may influence the type of tumor each developed will require further investigation.

The Impact of Routine Laundering on Ultraviolet Protection Factor (UPF) Values for Commercially Available Sun-Protective Clothing

Background Ultraviolet (UV) radiation has potentially harmful effects on the skin. Sunscreen products have historically focused on blocking UV-B radiation to prevent sunburns while efforts to block UV-A radiation have been lacking. UV protective clothing, rated by ultraviolet protection factor (UPF) values, has gained popularity as an alternative form of UV protection, offering a physical barrier against UV rays. However, concerns arise regarding the disclosure and sustainability of UV-protective textiles, as companies often do not disclose the methods used to achieve UV protection. The addition of chemical sunscreen additives to textiles raises questions about their potential release during laundering and their impact on sustained UV protection and environmental health. Further research is needed to understand the risks and benefits of these practices. Methods Seven garments from commercially available sun-protective brand names claiming UV protection were tested for UPF values. The garments were washed separately using cold water in commercially available detergent in cold water followed by drying on a low setting. UPF measurements were obtained at baseline and at intervals of 10 wash cycles until 50 wash cycles were completed. Results Two brands (Brands A and D) experienced a significant decrease in UPF value (70% to 78%) by the completion of 50 washes. Brand A disclosed the use of a nano-zinc additive in their garments while Brand D did not disclose the means of achieving UV protection. In comparison, five brands (Brands B, C, E, F, G) maintained relatively stable UPF values throughout the 50 washes. The comparison between Brand A and Brand G, who disclosed their UV protection methods, showed that Brand A gradually decreased in UPF value throughout the washes while Brand G remained stable. Conclusion The findings suggest that textile compositions with UV finishes may lose their UPF effectiveness during laundering by loss of the finish used over time or the textile integrity could be affected. This raises questions about the necessity of adding these UV finishes if there are fabrics that can maintain their UPF values without them.

Review on photoprotection: a clinician’s guide to the ingredients, characteristics, adverse effects, and disease-specific benefits of chemical and physical sunscreen compounds

Photoprotection is a critical health prevention strategy to reduce the deleterious effects of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and visible light (VL). Methods of photoprotection are reviewed in this paper, with an emphasis on sunscreen. The most appropriate sunscreen formulation for personal use depends on several factors. Active sunscreen ingredients vary in their protective effect over the UVR and VL spectrum. There are dermatologic diseases that cause photosensitivity or that are aggravated by a particular action spectrum. In these situations, sunscreen suggestions can address the specific concern. Sunscreen does not represent a single entity. Appropriate personalized sunscreen selection is critical to improve compliance and clinical outcomes. Health care providers can facilitate informed product selection with awareness of evolving sunscreen formulations and counseling patients on appropriate use. This review aims to summarize different forms of photoprotection, discuss absorption of sunscreen ingredients, possible adverse effects, and disease-specific preferences for chemical, physical or oral agents that may decrease UVR and VL harmful effects.

We Can Do Better at Protecting Our Service Members From Skin Cancer

Skin cancer rates have been steadily increasing among the American public for decades, but multiple studies have demonstrated that the U.S. military suffers from higher rates of skin cancer than the general public. As with so many aspects of health, simple preventive measures made early on can dramatically improve long-term health outcomes. Ample research has demonstrated that ultraviolet protection reduces skin damage and cancer rates. Although further research is needed to fully understand current barriers to soldiers' use of sun protection, we recommend a variety of simple measures the U.S. military can implement to reduce skin cancer risk for our soldiers. Early education and intervention to reduce skin cancer risk and promote sun-protective strategies is critical. These include improving sun protection offered by uniform items, such as increasing the availability of the sun hat, using eye protection with tinted inserts, and testing and publicizing the ultraviolet protection level of uniform items. We also recommend increasing sunscreen access for soldiers. Options to do so include issuing soldiers small portable packets or bottles of sunscreen to carry on their person, incorporating small packets of sunscreen in MREs, and issuing sunscreen to commands to distribute before field exercises. Unit and medical leadership should encourage the use of sunscreen and sun-protective strategies when possible; leadership engagement is critical to overcoming current behavioral barriers to change. Finally, we recommend that units attempt to reduce sun exposure during training by encouraging soldiers to seek shade and avoiding outdoor training in the middle of the day.