Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
To evaluate the protective effect of three Laboratoire VICHY formulations on the pigmentation caused by visible light in comparison to a non-treated control zone in healthy volunteers
The sunscreens usually used as photoprotectors are known to protect in the UV domain (UVB and UVA). However, until recently visible light (400-700 nm) was considered as devoid of any photobiological effects on cutaneous tissue. Over the last two decades, with the development of photodynamic therapies and various dermatological treatments using visible laser light, several studies have reconsidered the cutaneous effect of visible light on the skin, in particular the induction of pigmentation.
The aim of this study was to assess the ability of sunscreens with a protective efficacy in the UV domain to prevent the pigmentation induced by Visible Light.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Biophysical non-invasive assessment of skin color by using Chromameter® between the exposed zone (ZE) and non-exposed zone (ZNE) | Individual Typologic Angle (ITA° - calculated value), | At Day 1 before treatment (baseline), then Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 and Day 5 (24 hours after each Visible Light exposure). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical investigator's assessment by using clinical scale | Visual scoring of pigmentation, using a pigmentation 11-point scale with 0 (No pigmentation), 1 (Doubtful), 2 (Very pale brown -), 3 (Very pale brown), 4 (Very pale brown +), 5 (Pale brown -), 6 (Pale brown), 7 (Pale brown +), 8 (Brown -), 9 (Brown), 10 (Brown +) Visual scoring of erythema, using an erythema 4-point scale with 0 (Absent), 0.5 (Doubtful), 1 (Weak but well-defined erythema), 2 (Moderate), 3 (Severe) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Woman who was pregnant or lactating or who planned to become pregnant during the study period,
Subject having an underlying pathology, or a surgical, physical or medical status which, according to the investigator, could interfere with the interpretation of the study results, such as:
Subject having been exposed excessively to ultraviolet light (UV) either natural (sun) or artificial (tanning salon) during the 4 weeks before the screening visit or who planned to expose himself/herself during the study,
Subject having antecedent or current pathologies induced or aggravated by exposure to light or having abnormal reactions to sunlight (e.g. photosensitive dermatitis, polymorphous light eruption, solar urticaria, systemic lupus erythematosus, dermatomyositis),
Subject having taken a systemic treatment of more than 5 days during the month preceding inclusion (steroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories including aspirin, insulin, anti-histamines, anti-hypertensive drugs, antibiotics such as quinolones, tetracyclines, thiazides and fluoroquinolones, and all photosensitising treatments) or any other treatment capable of inducing an abnormal response to UV or visible light (vitamin A derivatives, psoralen, aminolevulinic acid derivatives…) or who planned to take these treatments during the study,
Subject who had applied a local treatment on the back for more than 2 days during the 2 weeks preceding inclusion (steroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories,, anti-histamines, antibiotics) and any cosmetic products in the 24 hours preceding inclusion,
Subject with clinically significant allergic antecedents, particularly to components of the test products
Person requiring enhanced protection (person deprived of liberty, minor, placed under guardianship),
Subject being in a situation which, according to the opinion of the Investigator, would have interfered with an optimal participation in the study
Subject participating in, or having participated in, another clinical study during the month preceding inclusion,
Subject unable to communicate effectively with the investigator or not able to follow the study imperatives.
Not provided
Not provided
Adults meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria and willing to adhere to the protocol and study procedures
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPCAD (Centre de Pharmacologie Clinique Appliquée à la Dermatologie) | Nice | 06202 | France |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| At Day 1 before treatment (baseline), then Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 and Day 5 (24 hours after each Visible Light exposure). |
| Safety / Local tolerance | Safety was assessed by recording Adverse Events, including cutaneous reactions (local intolerance) | From the informed consent signature date until the end of the study (Day 5) |
| Biophysical non-invasive assessment of skin color by using Chromameter® between the exposed zone (ZE) and non-exposed zone (ZNE) | Pigmentation (Delta E, Delta L* and Delta b* - calculated values) | At Day 1 before treatment (baseline), then Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 and Day 5 (24 hours after each Visible Light exposure). |
| Biophysical non-invasive assessment of skin color by using Chromameter® between the exposed zone (ZE) and non-exposed zone (ZNE) | Erythema (Delta a* - calculated value). | At Day 1 before treatment (baseline), then Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 and Day 5 (24 hours after each Visible Light exposure). |