欢迎访问《日用化学工业(中英文)》,今天是

日用化学工业(中英文) ›› 2024, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (11): 1382-1390.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2097-2806.2024.11.013

• 专论与综述 • 上一篇    下一篇

皮肤微生态调节型产品的评价方法概述

郑玉梅1,胡熔1,2,*(),吴文海1,宋丽雅3,王闻1,2   

  1. 1.斯坦德科创医药科技(青岛)有限公司,山东 青岛 266000
    2.斯坦德检测(广州)有限公司,广东 广州 510700
    3.北京工商大学 化学与材料工程学院,北京 100000
  • 收稿日期:2023-12-15 修回日期:2024-11-12 出版日期:2024-11-22 发布日期:2024-12-02

Efficacy assessment for skin microecology/microbiome-modulating cosmetics

Yumei Zheng1,Rong Hu1,2,*(),Wenhai Wu1,Liya Song3,Wen Wang1,2   

  1. 1. Standard Sci-tech Innovation (Qingdao) Pharmaceutical Technology Co., Ltd., Qingdao, Shandong 266000, China
    2. Standard Testing (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd., Guangzhou, Guangdong 510700, China
    3. College of Chemistry and Materials Engineering, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100000, China
  • Received:2023-12-15 Revised:2024-11-12 Online:2024-11-22 Published:2024-12-02
  • Contact: E-mail: rong_114819@163.com.

摘要:

综述了皮肤微生态调节型产品的评价方法,包括体外和人体测试方法,用于指导相关产品的研发与评价。化妆品可以通过直接改变皮肤微生物数量、生长代谢、群落结构、群体效应或通过调节皮肤免疫反应、改善皮肤生理功能等方式调节皮肤微生态平衡。皮肤微生物的数量、生长代谢水平、群体效应、皮肤免疫反应状态等评价指标常采用体外法。皮肤微生物的多样性、群落结构和皮肤生理状态常采用人体测试法,并结合16S rRNA扩增子测序、ITS扩增子测序、鸟枪法宏基因组测序等高通量测序技术。不同评价方法评估的维度和优势不同,体外法更具有靶向性,条件易于控制,但模型过于简单缺乏活性;相比之下,人体测试法更具有全观性,更符合真实使用场景,但很难定性个体差异、产品使用与微生物组变化之间复杂的因果关系。在评价过程中采用体外和人体测试相结合的方式,可以一定程度上互补不同评价方法的局限性,能为产品的效果提供更完整的证据链。

关键词: 皮肤微生态, 评价方法, 体外模型, 动物模型, 扩增子测序, 宏基因组

Abstract:

The in vitro and in vivo evaluation methods of microecological skin care products were summarized. Cosmetics can regulate skin microecological balance by directly changing the number, growth metabolism, community structure, and population effect of skin microorganisms, or by regulating skin immune response and improving skin physiological function. The number, growth and metabolism level, population effect of skin microorganisms and skin immune response status are often evaluated by in vitro method. Skin microbial diversity, community structure, and skin physiological state are often tested by human methods, combined with high-throughput sequencing technologies such as 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, ITS amplicon sequencing, and shotgun metagenomic sequencing. Different evaluation methods have different dimensions and advantages. The in vitro method is more targeted and the test conditions are easy to control, but the model is too simple and lack of activity. In contrast, clinical trials are more holistic and in line with real use scenarios, but it is difficult to qualitative analyze the complex causal relationship among individuals, product use and microbiome changes. In the process of efficacy evaluation, the combination of in vitro and in vivo can complement the limitations of different evaluation methods to a certain extent, and can provide a more complete evidence chain for the efficacy evaluation of products.

Key words: skin microbiome, efficacy assessment, in vitro, animal model, amplicon sequencing, metagenome

中图分类号: 

  • TQ658