| Literature DB >> 27524916 |
John P McCook1, Thomas J Stephens2, Lily I Jiang2, Robert M Law3, Vincent Gotz4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the effect of sodium copper chlorophyllin complex on the expression of biomarkers of photoaged dermal extracellular matrix indicative of skin repair. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following a previously published 12-day clinical assessment model, skin biopsy samples from the forearms of four healthy females with signs of photoaged skin were obtained and samples were analyzed by immunohistochemistry for key biomarkers of aging skin after each subject was treated with a test material consisting of a gel containing a liposomal dispersion of sodium copper chlorophyllin complex 0.05%, a positive control of tretinoin cream 0.025%, and an untreated negative control.Entities:
Keywords: glycosaminoglycans; hyaluronic acid; hyaluronidase; mucins; retinoid
Year: 2016 PMID: 27524916 PMCID: PMC4966572 DOI: 10.2147/CCID.S111139
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol ISSN: 1178-7015
Subject disposition and demographics
| All subjects (N=5) | Biopsy subjects (N=4) | |
|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | 50 (3.9) | 51 (3.7) |
| Median (min, max) | 49 (46, 55) | 51 (47, 55) |
| Female | 5 (100) | 4 (100) |
| Caucasian | 5 (100) | 4 (100) |
| II | 4 (80) | 3 (75) |
| III | 1 (20) | 1 (25) |
Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; min, minimum; max, maximum.
Descriptive statistics for biopsy results at day 12 (N=4 subjects)
| Parameter Treatment | Mean | Standard deviation | Minimum | Median | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test material | 1.25 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Reference control | 1.50 | 0.58 | 1.00 | 1.50 | 2.00 |
| Negative control | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Test material | 1.25 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Reference control | 1.50 | 0.58 | 1.00 | 1.50 | 2.00 |
| Negative control | 0.25 | 0.50 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| Test material | 1.25 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Reference control | 1.50 | 0.58 | 1.00 | 1.50 | 2.00 |
| Negative control | 0.50 | 0.58 | 0.00 | 0.50 | 1.00 |
| Test material | 1.75 | 0.96 | 1.00 | 1.50 | 3.00 |
| Reference control | 1.25 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Negative control | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Notes: Fibrillin, epidermal and dermal mucin are rated on four point (0–3) scale: 0 =normal, 3 =marked increased staining. Procollagen is rated on a 5 point (1–5) scale: 1 =<5% cells positive, 5 =>30% cells positive.
Comparison details between test products for biopsies at day 12
| Parameter | Overall | Comparison | Estimated mean difference | Standard error | Pairwise |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Procollagen I | 0.244 | Test material vs reference control | −0.25 | 0.26 | 0.632 |
| Test material vs negative control | 0.25 | 0.26 | 0.632 | ||
| Reference control vs negative control | 0.50 | 0.26 | 0.220 | ||
| Fibrillin/amyloid P | 0.002 | Test material vs reference control | −0.25 | 0.20 | 0.483 |
| Test material vs negative control | 1.00 | 0.20 | 0.006 | ||
| Reference control vs negative control | 1.25 | 0.20 | 0.002 | ||
| Epidermal mucins (Colloidal iron or Alcian blue/hyaluronidase) | 0.007 | Test material vs reference control | −0.25 | 0.20 | 0.483 |
| Test material vs negative control | 0.75 | 0.20 | 0.024 | ||
| Reference control vs negative control | 1.00 | 0.20 | 0.006 | ||
| Dermal mucin (Colloidal iron or Alcian blue/hyaluronidase) | 0.178 | Test material vs reference control | 0.50 | 0.35 | 0.392 |
| Test material vs negative control | 0.75 | 0.35 | 0.165 | ||
| Reference control vs negative control | 0.25 | 0.35 | 0.768 |
Notes:
P-value was calculated using a mixed effect model where test product is a fixed effect and subject is a random effect. Tukey’s honestly significant difference test was used for pairwise treatment comparison. The null hypothesis is that the mean scores are equal between treatments.