日用化学工业(中英文) ›› 2023, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (7): 816-825.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2097-2806.2023.07.012
收稿日期:
2022-06-15
修回日期:
2023-06-28
出版日期:
2023-07-22
发布日期:
2023-07-25
Received:
2022-06-15
Revised:
2023-06-28
Online:
2023-07-22
Published:
2023-07-25
Contact:
*Tel.: +86-17778139667, E-mail: lijing@eviskin.cn.
摘要:
在环境污染加重和护肤美容习惯改变等因素的影响下,皮肤刺激状态频繁发生。文章从消费者感知到的症状主要包括红斑、瘙痒、灼热感、紧绷感、干燥、疼痛等皮肤刺激状态出发,综述其可能发生机制和过程,全面地对功效评价方法进行梳理。目前已经报道有多种评价方法应用于食品、药品以及临床功效研究等方面,而对于化妆品的舒缓功效的评价方法的相关综述较少,文章梳理引发皮肤刺激状态的皮肤炎症反应、皮肤屏障和神经反应三条通路上的评价方法,从实验室试验(包括生物化学法、细胞生物学法、三维重组皮肤模型替代法、动物及动物替代实验法)、消费者使用测试以及人体功效评价试验(主观、半主观和客观仪器评价法)多角度概述其在化妆品功效评价中的应用,为化妆品舒缓功效的科学评价提供新的思路。
中图分类号:
冯法晴, 李静. 化妆品舒缓功效的科学评价方法[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2023, 53(7): 816-825.
Feng Faqing, Li Jing. Scientific evaluation methods for soothing cosmetics efficacy[J]. China Surfactant Detergent & Cosmetics, 2023, 53(7): 816-825.
表 1
常用于评价化妆品舒缓功效评价的细胞模型"
作用途径 | 细胞模型 | 测试指标 | 检测方法 |
---|---|---|---|
炎症 | LPS诱导巨噬细胞炎症模型[ | IL-6,IL-8,IL-1β,TNF-α等炎症因子 | ELISA,Western blot,qRT-PCR等 |
NO,PEG2,ET-1等炎症介质 | ELISA,Western blot,qRT-PCR等 | ||
COX-2,5-LOX,iNOS炎症相关酶 | ELISA,Western blot,qRT-PCR等 | ||
NF-κB,MAPK信号通路相关蛋白 | Western blot、qRT-PCR、免疫荧光等 | ||
炎症 | 肥大细胞脱颗粒、组胺释放实验[ | 细胞脱颗粒情况 | 显微镜观察 |
组胺释放 | ELISA | ||
皮肤屏障 | 细胞划痕试验(角质形成细胞HaCaT)[ | 细胞迁移率 | 显微镜拍照,用Image J分析图片 |
皮肤屏障 | 角质形成细胞模型[ | 屏障相关基因蛋白表达(Cldns 4/Cldns1) | 免疫组化、免疫荧光 |
神经 | 辣椒素受体(TRPV1)表达抑制试验(角质形成细胞)[ | TRPV-1蛋白表达 | 免疫细胞化学/免疫荧光、qRT-PCR或Western Blot |
表 2
常用于评价化妆品舒缓功效评价的3D皮肤模型"
作用途径 | 细胞模型 | 测试指标 | 检测方法 |
---|---|---|---|
炎症 | EpiKutis? 3D表皮模型[ SDS -EpiKutis? 3D表皮损伤模型 [ | 组织形态 | HE染色 |
细胞活力 | MTT法 | ||
IL-6,IL-8,IL-1β,TNF-α等炎症因子 | ELISA,Western blot,qRT-PCR等 | ||
NO,PEG2,ET-1等炎症介质 | ELISA,Western blot,qRT-PCR等 | ||
皮肤屏障 | SDS -EpiKutis? 3D表皮损伤模型[ | 组织形态 | HE染色 |
细胞活力 | MTT法 | ||
天然保湿因子,角质层脂质 | LC-MS,HPLC | ||
屏障相关蛋白TGM1,FLG,LOR,IVL等 | 免疫组化、免疫荧光、qRT-PCR或Western Blot |
表 4
半主观评价法用于SS的判定"
测试名称 | 测试区域 | 方法 | 结果解释 |
---|---|---|---|
乳酸刺痛试验[ | 鼻唇沟及任意一 侧面颊 | 涂抹50 μL 10%(V/V) 乳酸溶液5 min | 4分法进行评分(0分为没有刺痛感,1分为轻度刺痛,2分为中度刺痛,3分为重度刺痛)。分别在2.5和5 min时询问受试者的自觉症状,将两次分数相加,总分≥3分者为乳酸刺痛反应阳性 |
辣椒素试验[ | 一侧鼻唇沟外约1 cm处及任意 一侧面颊 | 将直径为0.8 cm的两层滤纸放置于一侧鼻唇沟外及任意一侧面颊,将含量为0.01%(m/V)辣椒素50 μL置于滤纸上 | 5分法进行评分(1分为勉强可以觉察,2分轻度可以觉察,3分为中度可以觉察,4分为重度可以觉察,5分为疼痛)。询问受试者的感觉,受试者的灼痛感觉持续>30 s,且程度≥3分者为阳性 |
氯仿∶薄荷醇(20∶80(V/V))试验[ | 面颊 | 涂抹(20∶80 (V/V))氯仿∶薄荷醇 | 在≤1 min内出现强烈烧灼感被认为是敏感皮肤 |
二甲基亚砜试验[ | 脸颊或前臂 | 涂抹2 mL 90%~100%(V/V)DMSO | 去除DMSO后5 min进行皮肤对DMSO反应的临床分级:(0=无反应,1=滤泡样风团,2=轻微隆起、坚实风团,3=明显高起、坚实风团),等级越高,皮肤越敏感 |
烟碱试验[ | 前臂 | 通过5 mm纸盘涂抹10 mmol/L烟酸甲酯1 min | 使用色度计,在皮肤敏感的个体中可以看到血管舒张增加 |
组胺试验[ | 前臂 | 皮内注射100 μg/1 mL组胺 | 所有被乳酸刺激后有刺痛感受的受试者,被组胺刺激后也有中度至重度的瘙痒症状 |
表 6
常用于评价化妆品舒缓功效评价的客观仪器评价方法"
作用途径 | 考察维度 | 测试指标 | 常用测试仪器/方法 |
---|---|---|---|
炎症/血管反应 | 皮肤发红程度 | 皮肤颜色a* | CM-700d/600d/2500d(Minolta,日本) |
皮肤红斑指数EI | Dermaspectrometer(Cortex Technology,丹麦)或Mexameter MX18(Courage & Khazaka,德国) | ||
皮肤敏感度TiVi-index | TiVi700(WheelsBridge,瑞典) | ||
皮肤微循环血流灌注量 | 激光多普勒血流仪(Moor,英国;或PeriScan PIM 3,瑞典) | ||
面部红区图像分析 | VISIA-CR/ VISIA(Canfield,美国) | ||
皮肤屏障 | 皮肤屏障功能 | 经皮水分散失 | AquaFluxAF200(Biox,英国);或Tewameter TM300(Courage & Khazaka,德国) |
皮肤酸碱度 | 皮肤pH | Skin-pH-Meter PH905/900(Courage & Khazaka,德国) | |
皮肤水分含量 | 角质层水分含量 | Corneometer CM825(Courage & Khazaka,德国) | |
皮肤油脂含量 | 皮肤油脂含量 | Sebumeter SM815(Courage & Khazaka,德国) | |
皮肤保温能力 | 皮肤温度 | 皮肤表面温度计(Digitalthermometer Greisinger Electronic,德国) | |
皮肤表面形态 | 皮肤表面形态 | VisioScan VC98(Courage & Khazaka,德国) | |
角质层厚度 | 角质层厚度 | 拉曼共聚焦显微镜测试 | |
表皮结构脂质分析 | 脂质类型、配比 | 胶带撕脱,LC-MS/MS定量 | |
屏障相关蛋白 | 丝聚合蛋白含量 | 胶带撕脱,免疫组化/荧光 | |
皮肤微生物群 | 微生物群落、多样性 | 16S rRNA测序 | |
神经 | 神经敏感度 | 皮肤电流感觉阈值 | Neurometer?(Neurotron,美国) |
[1] | Wu Jing, Hao Gang. Analysis of 617 cases of cosmetic adverse reaction monitoring reports[J]. Science of Daily Chemicals, 2020, 43 (9) : 3. |
[2] |
Abdlaty Ramy, Fang Qiyin. Skin erythema assessment techniques[J]. Clinics in Dermatology, 2021, 39 (4) : 591-604.
doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2021.03.006 |
[3] | Abdlaty Ramy, Hayward Joseph, Farrell Thomas, et al. Skin erythema and pigmentation: a review of optical assessment techniques[J]. Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy, 2021, 33: 102127. |
[4] | Martini Daniela, Del RIo Daniele. Health claims proposed under regulation (EC) No. 1924/2006 in the framework of maintenance of skin function: Claimed effects, outcome variables and methods of measurement[J]. Abstracts of Papers of the American Chemical Society, 2017, 10 (1) : 7. |
[5] |
Abels Christoph, Angelova-Fischer Irena. Skin care products: age-appropriate cosmetics[J]. Current Problems in Dermatology, 2018, 54: 173-182.
doi: 10.1159/000489531 pmid: 30130785 |
[6] | He Li, Liu Wei. Cosmetic dermatology[M]. Beijing: People’s Health Publishing House, 2010: 120-123. |
[7] |
Misery L, Stander S, Szepietowski J C, et al. Definition of sensitive skin: an expert position paper from the special interest group on sensitive skin of the international forum for the study of itch[J]. Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 2016, 97 (1) : 4.
doi: 10.2340/00015555-2397 |
[8] | He Li, Zheng Jie, Ma Huiqun, et al. Expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of sensitive skin in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Dermatology, 2017, 31 (1) : 1-4. |
[9] | Liao Yong, Ao Junhong, Yang Rongya. Research progress of sensitive skin[J]. Journal of Practical Dermatology, 2017, 10 (4) : 227-230. |
[10] | Mao Jinlong, Li Xiaoyu, Sun Rong. Discussion on the anti-inflammatory mechanism of cyclooxygenase (COX-2) inhibitors to improve cardiovascular safety[J]. China Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 2014, 39 (20) : 4054-4059. |
[11] | Jiang Shiyun, Wei Na, Fu Fengming. Research progress in anti-inflammatory research of cyclooxygenase-2/5-lipoxygenase dual-effect inhibitors[J]. Journal of Kunming University of Science and Technology (Natural Science Edition), 2017, 42 (4) : 73-78. |
[12] | Tian Yuan, Zhou Siqi, Takeda Reiko, et al. Anti-inflammatory activities of amber extract in lipopolysaccharide-induced RAW 264.7 macrophages[J]. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 2021, 141: 11854. |
[13] |
Chulwon Kim, Jun Ji, Seung Ho Baek, et al. Fermented dried Citrus unshiu peel extracts exert anti-inflammatory activities in LPS-induced RAW264.7 macrophages and improve skin moisturizing efficacy in immortalized human HaCaT keratinocytes[J]. Pharmaceutical Biology, 2019, 57 (1) : 392-402.
doi: 10.1080/13880209.2019.1621353 pmid: 31188689 |
[14] |
Park Cheolwoo, Park Jaeyoung, Kim WonJin, et al. Malonic acid isolated from Pinus densiflora inhibits UVB-induced oxidative stress and inflammation in HaCaT keratinocytes[J]. Polymers, 2021, 13 (5) : 816.
doi: 10.3390/polym13050816 |
[15] |
Anwar Adil, Anwar Hiba, Yamauchi Takeshi, et al. Bucillamine inhibits UVB-induced MAPK activation and apoptosis in human HaCaT keratinocytes and SKH-1 hairless mouse skin[J]. Photochemistry and Photobiology, 2020, 96 (4) : 870-876.
doi: 10.1111/php.13228 pmid: 32077107 |
[16] |
Chen Qing, Shao Liping, Li Yong, et al. Tanshinone IIA alleviates ovalbumin-induced allergic rhinitis symptoms by inhibiting Th2 cytokine production and mast cell histamine release in mice[J]. Pharmaceutical Biology, 2022, 60 (1) : 326-333.
doi: 10.1080/13880209.2022.2034894 pmid: 35167426 |
[17] |
Sajee T, Pithi C, Sagaw P, et al. Abalone collagen extracts potentiate stem cell properties of human epidermal keratinocytes[J]. Marine Drugs, 2019, 17 (7) : 424.
doi: 10.3390/md17070424 |
[18] |
Bolla B S, Erdei L, Urbán Et, et al. Cutibacterium acnes regulates the epidermal barrier properties of HPV-KER human immortalized keratinocyte cultures[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10 (1) : 12815.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69677-6 pmid: 32733073 |
[19] |
Li D G, Du H Y, Gerhard S, et al. Inhibition of TRPV1 prevented skin irritancy induced by phenoxyethanol. A preliminary in vitro and in vivo study[J]. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 2017, 39 (1) : 11-16.
doi: 10.1111/ics.12340 pmid: 27168163 |
[20] | Kong Xue, Zhao Hua, Tang Ying. Research progress of application of skin model in cosmetic efficacy evaluation[J]. Daily Chemical Industry, 2017, 47 (4) : 228-231. |
[21] |
Son K H, Heo M Y. The evaluation of depigmenting efficacy in the skin for the development of new whitening agents in Korea[J]. Int J Cosmet Sci., 2013, 35 (1) : 9-18.
doi: 10.1111/ics.2013.35.issue-1 |
[22] |
Chen Liang, Wu Meiyu, Jiang Shan, et al. Skin toxicity assessment of silver nanoparticles in a 3D epidermal model compared to 2D keratinocytes[J]. International Journal of Nanomedicine, 2019, 14: 9707-9719.
doi: 10.2147/IJN.S225451 pmid: 31849463 |
[23] |
Montero P, Milara J, PérezLeal M, et al. Paclitaxel-induced epidermal alterations: an in vitro preclinical assessment in primary keratinocytes and in a 3D epidermis model[J]. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2022, 23 (3) : 1142.
doi: 10.3390/ijms23031142 |
[24] | Fan Yumei, Tie Hang, Zhao Haiqing, et al. Repairing effect of donkey-hide gelatin on skin barrier damage[J]. Science of Daily Chemicals, 2021, 44 (12) : 18-22. |
[25] | Tie Hang, Lv Yufeng, Zhang Yang, et al. Effects of fermented extract of Staphylococcus epidermidis on human skin barrier[J]. Daily Chemical Industry, 2022, 52 (4) : 383-389. |
[26] | Yuan Huijie, Chen Xiaojuan, Yuan Guangming, et al. Protective effect of external application of aloe vera gel on inflammatory injury in mice[J]. Journal of Hubei University of Medicine, 2022, 41 (2) : 5. |
[27] | Lu Junjie, Li Guona, Zhang Chengbo, et al. Effects of test samples on skin barrier function in mice with skin mechanical barrier disorder[J]. Journal of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 2020, 34 (1) : 4. |
[28] | Shang Peisheng, Yu Junfeng, Zhan Mingfeng, et al. Study on the effect of Uygur ferruginosa on the itching threshold in rats with histamine phosphate[J]. Asia Pacific Traditional Medicine, 2015, 11 (1) : 19-20. |
[29] | Xiong X Y, Liu Y, Shan L T, et al. Evaluation of collagen mixture on promoting skin wound healing in zebrafish caused by acetic acid administration[J]. Biochemical & Biophysical Research Communications, 2018, 505 (2) : 516-522. |
[30] |
Naomi Ruth, Bahari Hasnah, Yazid Muhammad, et al. Zebrafish as a model system to study the mechanism of cutaneous wound healing and drug discovery: advantages and challenges[J]. Pharmaceuticals, 2021, 14 (10) : 1058.
doi: 10.3390/ph14101058 |
[31] | Liu Weiwei, Zhou Lin, Zhao Hua. Efficacy evaluation of cosmetics (ⅩⅢ): consumer use testing[J]. Daily Chemical Industry, 2021, 51 (6) : 6. |
[32] |
Do Le Hanh Dung, Azizi Nazanin, Maibach Howard. Sensitive skin syndrome: an update[J]. American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, 2020, 21 (3) : 401-409.
doi: 10.1007/s40257-019-00499-7 pmid: 31834575 |
[33] |
Martini D, Biasini B, Zavaroni I, et al. Claimed effects, outcome variables and methods of measurement for health claims proposed under European Community Regulation 1924/2006 in the area of blood glucose and insulin concentrations[J]. Acta Diabetologica, 2018, 55 (4) : 391-404.
doi: 10.1007/s00592-017-1095-6 pmid: 29383587 |
[34] | Lu Wanjiao, Wang Lumei, Li Junjie, et al. Efficacy of Shu-min radio-frequency combined with hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of facial sensitivity dermatitis[J]. Journal of Shanxi Medical University, 2018, 49 (4) : 410-412. |
[35] | Ni Boran, Zhao Jinxi, Huang Weijun, et al. Exploring a new method for evaluating the clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine based on visual analogue scale[J]. Zhonghua Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 2021, 36 (1) : 288-292. |
[36] | Yang Xueyuan, Xu Limin, Zhou Aimin, et al. Clinical observation on auxiliary treatment of atopic dermatitis with medical skin care products containing purslane and avocado tree extracts[J]. Journal of Clinical Dermatology, 2010, 39 (7) : 460-462. |
[37] |
Pan Yao, Ma Xue, Song Yanqing, et al. Questionnaire and lactic acid sting test play different role on the assessment of sensitive skin: a cross-sectional study[J]. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology, 2021, 14: 1215-1225.
doi: 10.2147/CCID.S325166 pmid: 34548802 |
[38] |
Marriott M, Holmes J, Peters L, et al. The complex problem of sensitive skin[J]. Contact Dermat, 2005, 53 (2) : 93-99.
doi: 10.1111/cod.2005.53.issue-2 |
[39] |
Chen S Y, Yin J, Wang X M, et al. A new discussion of the cutaneous vascular reactivity in sensitive skin: A sub-group of SS?[J]. Skin Research and Technology, 2018, 24 (3) : 432-439.
doi: 10.1111/srt.12446 pmid: 29396896 |
[40] |
Jourdain Roland, Bastien Philippe, de Lacharrière Olivier, et al. Detection thresholds of capsaicin: a new test to assess facial skin neurosensitivity[J]. Journal of Cosmetic Science, 2005, 56 (3) : 153-166.
pmid: 16116520 |
[41] |
Sulzberger M, Worthmann A C, Holtzmann U, et al. Effective treatment for sensitive skin: 4-t-butylcyclohexanol and licochalcone A[J]. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 2016, 30 (1) : 9-17.
doi: 10.1111/jdv.13529 |
[42] |
Abdlaty Ramy, Fang Qiyin. Skin erythema assessment techniques[J]. Clinics in Dermatology, 2021, 39 (4) : 591-604.
doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2021.03.006 |
[43] |
Wang X, Shu X, Li Z, et al. Comparison of two kinds of skin imaging analysis software: VISIA® from Canfield and IPP® from Media Cybernetics[J]. Skin Research and Technology, 2018, 24 (3) : 379-385.
doi: 10.1111/srt.12440 pmid: 29377397 |
[44] |
Bornkessel A, Flach M, Arens-Corell M, et al. Functional assessment of a washing emulsion for sensitive skin: mild impairment of stratum corneum hydration, pH, barrier function, lipid content, integrity and cohesion in a controlled washing test[J]. Skin Research and Technology, 2005, 11 (1) : 53-60.
pmid: 15691260 |
[45] | Ma Yuchen, Cui Le, Tian Yan, et al. Lipidomics analysis of facial lipid biomarkers in females with self-perceived skin sensitivity[J]. Health Sci Rep, 2022, 5 (3) : 632. |
[46] |
Bai Y, Wang Y, Zheng H, et al. Correlation between facial skin microbiota and skin barriers in a chinese female population with sensitive skin[J]. Infection and Drug Resistance, 2021, 14: 219-226.
doi: 10.2147/IDR.S287844 pmid: 33519216 |
[47] | Li Shuyuan, Wang Xuemin, Gao Yanrui, et al. Significance of current sensory threshold in the diagnosis of neurogenic sensitive skin[J]. Journal of Clinical Dermatology, 2014, 43 (1) : 11-13. |
[1] | 许梦然, 赵华. 化妆品晒后修护功效评价方法研究进展[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2024, 54(3): 329-336. |
[2] | 李慧怡, 周悦, 吴谦, 杜丽镝, 谢嘉颖, 谭建华. 化妆品防晒黑功效评价方法研究[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2024, 54(2): 168-174. |
[3] | 马月滢, 刘琦, 加萌, 王俊杰, 王玮, 赵华. 一款紧致化妆品的功效评价方法研究[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2024, 54(1): 73-79. |
[4] | 王继才, 简锐东, 谢宇, 陈晓斌, 周艺, 谭建华. 牙膏去除外源性色斑功效评价方法的标准化研究[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2023, 53(9): 1101-1107. |
[5] | 李思玥, 韩蕊, 刘琦, 李岳秦, 赵华. 化妆品控油功效评价方法研究进展[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2023, 53(5): 560-566. |
[6] | 朱志贤, 陈国宝, 陈保华. 硬脂醇甘草亭酸酯体外舒缓抗敏功效评价[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2023, 53(5): 532-537. |
[7] | 谭淇丹, 毕永贤, 刘蕾, 胡雪情, 代晓艳. 化妆品舒缓功效评价的研究现状[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2023, 53(2): 193-201. |
[8] | 曹晨灿, 谭淇丹, 刘蕾, 杨小玉, 陈海峰. 用于抗糖化功效评价的细胞模型研究现状及应用前景[J]. 日用化学工业(中英文), 2023, 53(12): 1451-1458. |
[9] | 薛婉婷,李丽,董银卯,郭苗苗. 美白功效评价现状及发展趋势[J]. 日用化学工业, 2021, 51(9): 890-896. |
[10] | 刘唯一,周琳,赵华. 化妆品功效评价(ⅩⅢ)——消费者使用测试[J]. 日用化学工业, 2021, 51(6): 485-490. |
[11] | 马宇晨,刘蕾,何聪芬. 用于化妆品功效评价的皮肤细胞类型、特点及应用概况[J]. 日用化学工业, 2021, 51(1): 50-55. |
[12] | 王志鹏,沈慧慧,罗丹,陈丹,盛剑勇,刘卫. 防脱生发活性物共输送纳米脂质体的制备及功效评价[J]. 日用化学工业, 2020, 50(6): 396-401. |
[13] | 欧春凤,许晓华,万阳,徐晶,夏晓初,马义. 复合多肽眼霜的延缓衰老功效测试与分析[J]. 日用化学工业, 2020, 50(5): 331-335. |
[14] | 杨泽茹,韦月仙,范展华,刘琦,王敏,赵华. 基于图像分析的化妆品紧致功效评价方法研究[J]. 日用化学工业, 2020, 50(12): 854-860. |
[15] | 马雪,宋艳青,盘瑶,赵华,卢永波,范展华. 化妆品功效评价(Ⅻ)—皮肤生理学检测在化妆品功效评价中的应用[J]. 日用化学工业, 2020, 50(1): 14-19. |
|