BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the tolerance of preservative free sterile cleanser and sterile moisturizer in irritated and sensitive face skin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An exploratory, open-label study using the cleanser and the moisturizer in combination was performed with 98 patients with a documented history of allergic contact dermatitis. The 2 products could each be used once or twice daily for 28 days. The assessment parameters at baseline and end of treatment (day 28) included the intensity of erythema, dryness/scaling by the investigator and subjective signs (burning, pruritus and stinging), according to a defined 4-point scale (absent to severe). In addition, a global assessment of the change from baseline and the overall tolerance of the products were performed by the investigator at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included for the efficacy analysis and 96 patients for the safety analysis. At baseline, a majority of patients expressed some degree of erythema (63%), and dryness/scaling (56%). Fewer patients experienced subjective signs at baseline (44%). At the end of treatment, the results showed a statistically significant improvement of all the objective signs of irritated skin (P = .0001, Mac Nemar test), as well as the subjective signs of sensitive skin (P < 0.02). This was confirmed by the overall investigator assessment, showing an excellent or good response in 90% of the patients. In the safety analysis, 1 patient developed contact allergy to 1 ingredient of the test products (carbomer), and 3 patients exacerbated their dermatitis. CONCLUSION: Taken together, these results suggest that adequately formulated cosmetics might reduce both irritated and sensitive skin, with clinical improvement of dryness, erythema and stinging.
BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the tolerance of preservative free sterile cleanser and sterile moisturizer in irritated and sensitive face skin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An exploratory, open-label study using the cleanser and the moisturizer in combination was performed with 98 patients with a documented history of allergic contact dermatitis. The 2 products could each be used once or twice daily for 28 days. The assessment parameters at baseline and end of treatment (day 28) included the intensity of erythema, dryness/scaling by the investigator and subjective signs (burning, pruritus and stinging), according to a defined 4-point scale (absent to severe). In addition, a global assessment of the change from baseline and the overall tolerance of the products were performed by the investigator at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included for the efficacy analysis and 96 patients for the safety analysis. At baseline, a majority of patients expressed some degree of erythema (63%), and dryness/scaling (56%). Fewer patients experienced subjective signs at baseline (44%). At the end of treatment, the results showed a statistically significant improvement of all the objective signs of irritated skin (P = .0001, Mac Nemar test), as well as the subjective signs of sensitive skin (P < 0.02). This was confirmed by the overall investigator assessment, showing an excellent or good response in 90% of the patients. In the safety analysis, 1 patient developed contact allergy to 1 ingredient of the test products (carbomer), and 3 patients exacerbated their dermatitis. CONCLUSION: Taken together, these results suggest that adequately formulated cosmetics might reduce both irritated and sensitive skin, with clinical improvement of dryness, erythema and stinging.