BACKGROUND: The ultraviolet (UV) erythema test is one of the most frequently used methods to investigate the anti-inflammatory potency of topical dermatological preparations in vivo. METHODS: The following questions were addressed in four separate studies with healthy persons (skin types 2 and 3): (1) the optimal localization was determined by comparing light scales on the back, buttocks and volar forearms; (2) the optimal UV-B dose was determined by comparing the 1-fold, 1.5-fold and 2-fold minimal erythema doses (MEDs); (3) hydrocortisone and prednicarbate were evaluated as positive controls, and a sample size calculation was performed, and (4) betamethasone valerate and pimecrolimus were tested as further positive controls in the optimized study model. RESULTS: The back proved to be the best localization for the UV erythema test. It showed a good correlation between the light scale and the test areas. The 1.5-fold MED was the best irradiation dose. In contrast to prednicarbate and betamethasone valerate, hydrocortisone was a rather weak positive control. However, when the sample size was > or = 40 subjects, significant results were also obtained with hydrocortisone. Pimecrolimus was not effective in the UV erythema test. CONCLUSIONS: The UV erythema test should be performed on the back with at least 40 subjects using the 1.5-fold MED. It may be useful to include a potent corticosteroid, such as prednicarbate or betamethasone valerate, in addition to hydrocortisone. The UV erythema test seems to be suitable only for substances with corticosteroid-like effects, since in this test model the calcineurin inhibitor pimecrolimus was not effective. Copyright 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel
BACKGROUND: The ultraviolet (UV) erythema test is one of the most frequently used methods to investigate the anti-inflammatory potency of topical dermatological preparations in vivo. METHODS: The following questions were addressed in four separate studies with healthy persons (skin types 2 and 3): (1) the optimal localization was determined by comparing light scales on the back, buttocks and volar forearms; (2) the optimal UV-B dose was determined by comparing the 1-fold, 1.5-fold and 2-fold minimal erythema doses (MEDs); (3) hydrocortisone and prednicarbate were evaluated as positive controls, and a sample size calculation was performed, and (4) betamethasone valerate and pimecrolimus were tested as further positive controls in the optimized study model. RESULTS: The back proved to be the best localization for the UV erythema test. It showed a good correlation between the light scale and the test areas. The 1.5-fold MED was the best irradiation dose. In contrast to prednicarbate and betamethasone valerate, hydrocortisone was a rather weak positive control. However, when the sample size was > or = 40 subjects, significant results were also obtained with hydrocortisone. Pimecrolimus was not effective in the UV erythema test. CONCLUSIONS: The UV erythema test should be performed on the back with at least 40 subjects using the 1.5-fold MED. It may be useful to include a potent corticosteroid, such as prednicarbate or betamethasone valerate, in addition to hydrocortisone. The UV erythema test seems to be suitable only for substances with corticosteroid-like effects, since in this test model the calcineurin inhibitorpimecrolimus was not effective. Copyright 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel