print this page - save to favorites print this page add to favorites

Improving Skin Barrier Function with Topical Niacinamide

Amy V. Trejo, Ph.D.; Cindy A. Berge, B.S., A.S.C.P.; Donald L. Bissett, Ph.D.; Kevin J. Mills, Ph.D.

The Procter & Gamble Company, Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S.A.

INTRODUCTION

VitaNiacin, an exclusive combination of niacinamide, panthenol, and tocopheryl acetate, has been shown to elicit a large number of improvements in the appearance of the skin, including reducing the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles and smoothing of skin texture and tone. Given the importance of competent barrier function in the maintenance of healthy skin condition, we were interested in determining whether the spectrum of skin benefits delivered by VitaNiacin were associated with improvements in epidermal barrier function as measured by transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and resistance to two forms of stratum corneum damage. We were also interested in determining whether VitaNiacin treatment affected rates of repair following damage to the barrier.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of topical treatment with either niacinamide or VitaNiacin on skin barrier function and repair, as assessed by both chemical (sodium lauryl sulfate) and mechanical (tape strip) insult , across a variety of anatomical sites (arms, legs, face).

METHODS

Facial Study

The facial benefits study was a 10 week, randomized, double-blinded, split-face round robin clinical study to evaluate and compare the anti-aging effects of 2 treatment products: a moisturizing cream vehicle and, the same moisturizing vehicle containing 3.5% niacinamide on the facial skin of 90 female subjects, ages 35 to 55. The study consisted of a 2-week pre-conditioning period and an 8- week treatment period. At the start of the treatment period (baseline), and at the week 4 and 8 visits, skin barrier function was assessed with the DermalabTEWL (Figure 1).

METHODS

METHODS

Leg Study

The leg study was an 8 week randomized, double-blinded, clinical study that consisted of a 1 week pre-conditioning period, a 6 week treatment period and a 1 week regression period. It was designed to compare the effects of a moisturizing cream vehicle and the vehicle cream containing VitaNiacin on the leg skin of 48 female subjects, ages 18 to 55. The treatments were randomized and balanced among skin sites located on the outer surface of the subjects' lower calf, so that each treatment appeared on each location an equal number of times. At the start of the treatment period (baseline) and at the Week 4, week 6 and week 7 visits, skin barrier function was evaluated using a DermalabTEWL (Figure 2). At the 6 week visit, patches containing 0.5% SLS were applied to a small area within each skin site. These patches remained in contact with the skin for 24 + 1 hours. TEWL measures were taken 4 and 24 hours post-patch removal to assess the skin's ability to resist and repair chemical insult (Figure 3). Additionally, 20 sequential D'Squametape strippings were collected from another location within each treatment site. This insult was followed by TEWL measurements 15 minutes and 24 hours post stripping of each skin site to assess the skin's ability to resist and repair mechanical insult (Figure 4).

 

Arm Study

The forearm study was an 8-week double-blinded clinical trial that consisted of a 1-week pre-conditioning period and a 6- week treatment period followed by 1 week of skin barrier function and regression testing. The study compared the effects of 2 test products versus an untreated control site on the forearm skin of 65 female subjects, 18-55 years of age. At the start of the treatment period (baseline) and at the week 2, 4 and 6 visits, skin barrier function was evaluated using a DermalabTEWL (Figure 5). At the 6 week visit, patches containing 0.5% SLS were applied to a small area within each skin site. These patches remained in contact with the skin for 24 + 1 hours. TEWL measures were taken 4 and 24, 48 & 72 hours post-patch removal to assess the skin's ability to resist and repair chemical insult (Figure 6). Additionally, 20 sequential 3MTMBlendermTM tape strippings were collected from another location within each treatment site. This insult was followed by TEWL measurements 5 minutes and 4, 24 and 48 hours post stripping of each skin site to assess the skin's ability to resist and repair mechanical insult (Figure 7).

 

RESULTS

(Insert Facial Study graph here)

Figure 1: Skin barrier condition was assessed as a function of product treatment, using a

DermalabTEWL . Transepidermal water loss is reported as grams of water evaporated

per meter squared of skin per hour (y axis) as a function of treatment duration (x axis). S =

significance at p< 0.002 relative to vehicle control.

(Insert Leg Study graph here)

Figure 2: Skin barrier condition was assessed as a function of product treatment, using a

DermalabTEWL. Transepidermal water loss data are reported as grams of water evaporated

per meter squared of skin per hour (y axis) as a function of treatment duration (x axis). S =

significance at p< 0.05 relative to vehicle control.

(Insert graph here)

Figure 3: The ability of the treated skin to withstand chemical insult was assessed via TEWL

measurements taken 4 and 24 hours post removal of 24-hour patches containing 0.5% SLS.

Transepidermal water loss data are reported as grams of water evaporated per meter squared of

skin per hour (y axis). S = significance at p< 0.05 relative to vehicle control.

(Insert graph here)
Figure 4: The ability of the treated skin to withstand mechanical insult was assessed via TEWL

measurements taken 15 minutes and 24 hours post D'Squame tape stripping was performed.

Transepidermal water loss data are reported as grams of water evaporated per meter squared

of skin per hour (y axis). S = significance at p< 0.05 relative to vehicle control.

(Insert Arm Study here)

Figure 5: Skin barrier condition was assessed as a function of product treatment, using a

DermalabTEWL. Transepidermal water loss data are reported as grams of water evaporated

per meter squared of skin per hour (y axis) as a function of treatment duration (x axis). S =

significance at p< 0.05 relative to vehicle control.

(Insert bar graph here)

Figure 6: The ability of the treated skin to withstand chemical insult was assessed via TEWL

measurements taken 4, 24, 48 and 72 hours post removal of 24-hour patches containing 0.5%

SLS. Transepidermal water loss data are reported as grams of water evaporated per meter

squared of skin per hour (y axis). S = significance at p< 0.05 relative to vehicle control.

(Insert bar graph here)

Figure 7: The ability of the treated skin to withstand mechanical insult was assessed via TEWL

measurements taken 5 minutes and 4, 24 and 48 hours post 3MTMBlendermTM tape stripping was

performed. Transepidermal water loss data are reported as grams of water evaporated per

meter squared of skin per hour (y axis). S = significance at p< 0.1 relative to vehicle control.

CONCLUSIONS

  • Topical treatment with niacinamide/ VitaNiacin in cosmetic formulations improves

skin barrier function across multiple body sites (arms, legs, face) beyond a typical moisturizing cream.

  • Topical treatment with VitaNiacin improves the skin's resistance and accelerates the

rate of repair of chemical (sodium lauryl sulfate) and mechanical (tape strip) insults.

  • The skin barrier enhancing effects of niacinamide/ VitaNiacin can be seen during

different seasons of the year.

 

http://www.pgbeautyscience.com/en_UK/pdf/poster_8Trejo2003.pdf

 

© 2013 Procter & Gamble | Home | Site Map | Privacy Notice | Ad ChoicesAd Choices P&G Beauty & Grooming
The Procter & Gamble Company BBB Business Review