Hot topics on UV filter ingredients

References

• Ahmed FK. Worldwide regulation of UV filters: current status and future trends. In: Clinical Guide to Sunscreens and Photoprotection. Lim HW, Draelos ZD (Eds). Informa Healthcare, New York, NY, USA, 65–81 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. European Union Council Directive of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium (Amended 2010).
   Google Scholar
• Sambandan DR, Ratner D. Sunscreens: an overview and update. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.64, 748–758 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Federal Drugs Agency. Sunscreen drug products for over-the-counter human use. Fed. Reg.43, 38206 (1978).
   Google Scholar
• Miller TF. US FDA protocol for determining sun protection factor. In: Sunscreens-Regulations and Commercial Development. Shaath NA (Ed.). Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, Fl, USA, 769–778 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Brown M. SPF testing in Europe. In: Sunscreens-Regulations and Commercial Development. Shaath NA (Ed.). Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, Fl, USA, 779–806 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Diffey BL, Ferguson J. Assessment of photoprotective properties of sunscreens. In: Clinical Guide to Sunscreens and Photoprotection. Lim HW, Draelos ZD (Eds). Informa Healthcare, New York, NY, USA, 53–63 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• COLIPA. International sun protection factor (SPF) test method. COLIPA, Brussels, Belgium (2006).
   Google Scholar
• FDA. Sunscreen Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use, 72 Fed. Reg. 49070 (August 27, 2007). FDA, MD, USA (amended 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Schilling K, Bradford B, Castelli D et al. Human safety review of ‘nano’ titanium dioxide and zinc oxide. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci.9, 495–509 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadrieh N, Wokovich AM, Gopee NV et al. Lack of significant dermal penetration of titanium dioxide from sunscreen formulations containing nano- and submicron-size TiO2 particles. Toxicol. Sci.115, 156–166 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choksi AN, Poonawalla T, Wilkerson MG. Nanoparticles: a closer look at their dermal effects. J. Drugs Dermatol.9, 475–481 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunford R, Salinaro A, Cai L et al. Chemical oxidation and DNA damage catalysed by inorganic sunscreen ingredients. FEBS Lett.418, 87–90 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uchino T, Tokunaga H, Ando M, Utsumi H. Quantitative determination of OH radical generation and its cytotoxicity induced by TiO2-UVA treatment. Toxicol. In Vitro.16, 629–635 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman MD, Stotland M, Ellis JI. The safety of nanosized particles in titanium dioxide- and zinc oxide-based sunscreens. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.61, 685–692 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesenthal A, Hunter L, Wang S, Wickliffe J, Wilkerson M. Nanoparticles: small and mighty. Int. J. Dermatol.50, 247–254 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross SE, Innes B, Roberts MS, Tsuzuki T, Robertson TA, McCormick P. Human skin penetration of sunscreen nanoparticles: in vitro assessment of a novel micronized zinc oxide formulation. Skin Pharmacol. Physiol.20, 148–154 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filipe P, Silva JN, Silva R et al. Stratum corneum is an effective barrier to TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticle percutaneous absorption. Skin Pharmacol. Physiol.22, 266–275 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnett ME, Wang SQ. Current sunscreen controversies: a critical review. Photodermatol. Photoimmunol. Photomed.27, 58–67 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. Opinion on Safety of Nanomaterials in Cosmetic Products. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Shaath NA. Evolution of modern sunscreen chemicals. In: Sunscreens, Development, Evaluation, and Regulatory Aspects. Lowe NJ, Shaath NA (Eds). Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 3–35 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Osterwalder U, Herzog B. Chemistry and properties of organic and inorganic UV filters. In: Clinical Guide to Sunscreens and Photoprotection. Lim HW, Draelos ZD (Eds). Informa Healthcare, New York, NY, USA, 11–63 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Palm MD, O’Donoghue MN. Update on photoprotection. Dermatol. Ther.20, 360–376 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moloney FJ, Collins S, Murphy GM. Sunscreens: safety, efficacy and appropriate use. Am. J. Clin Dermatol.3, 185–191 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perugini P, Simeoni S, Scalia S et al. Effect of nanoparticle encapsulation on the photostability of the sunscreen agent, 2-ethylhexyl-p-methoxycinnamate. Int. J. Pharm.246, 37–45 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustavsson Gonzalez H, Farbrot A, Larko O. Percutaneous absorption of benzophenone-3, a common component of topical sunscreens. Clin. Exp. Dermatol.27, 691–694 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayre RM, Dowdy JC, Gerwig AJ, Shields WJ, Lloyd RV. Unexpected photolysis of the sunscreen octinoxate in the presence of the sunscreen avobenzone. Photochem. Photobiol.81, 452–456 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspar LR, Maia Campos PM. Evaluation of the photostability of different UV filter combinations in a sunscreen. Int. J. Pharm.307, 123–128 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forestier S. Rationale for sunscreen development. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.58, S133–S138 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole CA, Vollhardt J, Mendrok C. Formulation and stability of sunscreen products. In: Clinical Guide to Sunscreens and Photoprotection. Lim HW, Draelos ZD (Eds). Informa Healthcare, New York, NY, USA, 39–51 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Wakefield G, Lipscomb S, Holland E, Knowland J. The effects of manganese doping on UVA absorption and free radical generation of micronised titanium dioxide and its consequences for the photostability of UVA absorbing organic sunscreen components. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci.3, 648–652 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antoniou C, Kosmadaki MG, Stratigos AJ, Katsambas AD. Sunscreens-what’s important to know. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol.22, 1110–1118 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schauder S, Ippen H. Contact and photocontact sensitivity to sunscreens. Review of a 15-year experience and of the literature. Contact Dermatitis37, 221–232 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheuer E, Warshaw E. Sunscreen allergy: a review of epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and responsible allergens. Dermatitis17, 3–11 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darvay A, White IR, Rycroft RJ, Jones AB, Hawk JL, McFadden JP. Photoallergic contact dermatitis is uncommon. Br. J. Dermatol.145, 597–601 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr AC, Niklasson B, Dawe RS et al. A double-blind, randomized assessment of the irritant potential of sunscreen chemical dilutions used in photopatch testing. Contact Dermatitis60, 203–209 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Primavera G, Berardesca E. Sensitive skin: mechanisms and diagnosis. Int. J. Cosmet. Sci.2(27), 1–10 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Willis CM, Shaw S, De Lacharrière O et al. Sensitive skin: an epidemiological study. Br. J. Dermatol.145, 258–263 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez E, Valbuena MC, Rey M, Porras de Quintana L. Causal agents of photoallergic contact dermatitis diagnosed in the national institute of dermatology of Colombia. Photodermatol. Photoimmunol. Photomed.22, 189–192 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berne B, Ros AM. 7 years experience of photopatch testing with sunscreen allergens in Sweden. Contact Dermatitis38, 61–64 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim HW. Abnormal responses to ultraviolet radiation: photosensitivity induced by exogenous agents. In: Dermatology in General Medicine, Wolff K, Goldsmith LA, Katzet SI et al. (Eds). McGraw–Hill, New York, NY, USA, 828–834 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Bruynzeel DP, Ferguson J, Andersen K et al. European taskforce for photopatch testing. Photopatch testing: a consensus methodology for Europe. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol.18, 679–682 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valdivielso-Ramos M, Herranz JM. Update on photoprotection in children. An. Pediatr. (Barc.)72(4), 282, e1–e9 (2010).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nash JF. Systemic effects of topically applied sunscreen ingredients. In: Clinical Guide to Sunscreens and Photoprotection. Lim HW, Draelos ZD (Eds). Informa Healthcare, New York, NY, USA, 139–154 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Chételat A, Albertini S, Dresp JH, Strobel R, Gocke E. Photomutagenesis test development: I. 8-Methoxypsoralen, chlorpromazine and sunscreen compounds in bacterial and yeast assays. Mutat. Res.292, 241–250 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toyoshima M, Hosoda K, Hanamura M, Okamoto K, Kobayashi H, Negishi T. Alternative methods to evaluate the protective ability of sunscreen against photo-genotoxicity. Photochem. Photobiol.73, 59–66 (2004).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlumpf M, Jarry H, Wuttke W, Ma R, Lichtensteiger W. Estrogenic activity and estrogen receptor β binding of the UV filter 3-benzylidene camphor. Comparison with 4-methylbenzylidene camphor. Toxicology199, 109–120 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlumpf M, Schmid P, Durrer S et al. Lichtensteiger endocrine activity and developmental toxicity of cosmetic UV filters-an update. Toxicology205, 113–122 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janjua NR, Mogensen B, Andersson AM et al. Systemic absorption of the sunscreens benzophenone-3, octyl-methoxycinnamate, and 3-(4-methyl-benzylidene) camphor after whole-body topical application and reproductive hormone levels in humans. J. Invest. Dermatol.123, 57–61 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janjua NR, Kongshoj B, Andersson AM, Wulf HC. Sunscreens in human plasma and urine after repeated whole-body topical application. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol.22, 456–461 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. Opinion concerning 4-Methylbenzylidene Camphor (4-MBC) COLIPA n. S60. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium (2008).
   Google Scholar