Regional Differences of Cutaneous Irritation and Its Effect on Skin Barrier Recovery
NCT ID: NCT03231813
Last Updated: 2017-10-02
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
25 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-08-29
2017-09-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Skin parameters vary depending on anatomic location of measured skin. There is a difference in stratum corneum thickness, hydration and transepidermal water loss across different locations, including between volar forearm and upper back.
Furthermore, regional difference in skin response to irritation by tape stripping and benzalkonium chloride were observed. Such differences are also possible in SLS irritation model. One study has shown higher, but not statistically significant, response of back in comparison to forearms, but it had a very small sample size (n=9).
Moreover, there are regional variations of topical preparations absorption. Hydrocortisone had 1,7 times higher absorption when applied to upper back in comparison to forearms. Those variations could be explained by different corneocyte size and number of their layers between back and hands.
Skin baseline properties and response to irritation seem to be dependent on anatomic position. Those differences could mean different response to treatment. Since published trials only tested efficacy of various preparations on one anatomic location, it is possible their results would be different if tested on other body parts. It could limit validity and usefulness of conducted trials. The aim of this study is to determine if there are regional differences of skin response to irritation and emollient cream treatment in irritant contact dermatitis model.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
SINGLE_GROUP
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
SLS irritation model and Treatment
SLS induced irritation on two sites each on forearms and back Emollient cream treatment
Sodium lauryl sulphate induced irritation
Sodium lauryl sulphate will be applied to specified skin sites according to randomization protocol to induce irritation. 60 uL of 2% w/v SLS will be applied to skin under occlusion by large Finn chamber for 24 hours as described in the guidelines by Standardization group of European Society of Contact Dermatitis.
Emollient, moisturizing cream
Commercially available topical emollient cream will be applied by each participant to treatment sites according to randomization protocol.
SLS irritation model and No Treatment
SLS induced irritation on two sites each on forearms and back No treatment
Sodium lauryl sulphate induced irritation
Sodium lauryl sulphate will be applied to specified skin sites according to randomization protocol to induce irritation. 60 uL of 2% w/v SLS will be applied to skin under occlusion by large Finn chamber for 24 hours as described in the guidelines by Standardization group of European Society of Contact Dermatitis.
Sham irritation and Treatment
Sham irritation (water) on two sites each on forearms and back Emollient cream treatment
Emollient, moisturizing cream
Commercially available topical emollient cream will be applied by each participant to treatment sites according to randomization protocol.
Sham irritation and No Treatment
Sham irritation (water) on two sites each on forearms and back No treatment
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Sodium lauryl sulphate induced irritation
Sodium lauryl sulphate will be applied to specified skin sites according to randomization protocol to induce irritation. 60 uL of 2% w/v SLS will be applied to skin under occlusion by large Finn chamber for 24 hours as described in the guidelines by Standardization group of European Society of Contact Dermatitis.
Emollient, moisturizing cream
Commercially available topical emollient cream will be applied by each participant to treatment sites according to randomization protocol.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
35 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Split, School of Medicine
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Dario Leskur, MPharm
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Split, School of Medicine
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
School of Medicine
Split, , Croatia
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Tupker RA, Willis C, Berardesca E, Lee CH, Fartasch M, Agner T, Serup J. Guidelines on sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) exposure tests. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1997 Aug;37(2):53-69. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1997.tb00041.x.
Wilhelm KP, Cua AB, Maibach HI. Skin aging. Effect on transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, skin surface pH, and casual sebum content. Arch Dermatol. 1991 Dec;127(12):1806-9. doi: 10.1001/archderm.127.12.1806.
Schwindt DA, Wilhelm KP, Maibach HI. Water diffusion characteristics of human stratum corneum at different anatomical sites in vivo. J Invest Dermatol. 1998 Sep;111(3):385-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1747.1998.00321.x.
Lee CH, Maibach HI. The sodium lauryl sulfate model: an overview. Contact Dermatitis. 1995 Jul;33(1):1-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1995.tb00438.x.
Tagami H. Location-related differences in structure and function of the stratum corneum with special emphasis on those of the facial skin. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2008 Dec;30(6):413-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2494.2008.00459.x.
Nedelec B, Forget NJ, Hurtubise T, Cimino S, de Muszka F, Legault A, Liu WL, de Oliveira A, Calva V, Correa JA. Skin characteristics: normative data for elasticity, erythema, melanin, and thickness at 16 different anatomical locations. Skin Res Technol. 2016 Aug;22(3):263-75. doi: 10.1111/srt.12256. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
Darlenski R, Fluhr JW. Influence of skin type, race, sex, and anatomic location on epidermal barrier function. Clin Dermatol. 2012 May-Jun;30(3):269-73. doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2011.08.013.
Berardesca E, Distante F. The modulation of skin irritation. Contact Dermatitis. 1994 Nov;31(5):281-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1994.tb02019.x.
Emtestam L, Ollmar S. Electrical impedance index in human skin: measurements after occlusion, in 5 anatomical regions and in mild irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1993 Feb;28(2):104-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1993.tb03352.x.
Cua AB, Wilhelm KP, Maibach HI. Frictional properties of human skin: relation to age, sex and anatomical region, stratum corneum hydration and transepidermal water loss. Br J Dermatol. 1990 Oct;123(4):473-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb01452.x.
Kleesz P, Darlenski R, Fluhr JW. Full-body skin mapping for six biophysical parameters: baseline values at 16 anatomical sites in 125 human subjects. Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2012;25(1):25-33. doi: 10.1159/000330721. Epub 2011 Sep 7.
Lavrijsen AP, Geelen FA, Oestmann E, Hermans J, Bodda HE, Ponec M. Comparison of human back versus arm skin region for its suitability to test weak irritants. Skin Res Technol. 1996 May;2(2):70-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.1996.tb00062.x.
Holbrook KA, Odland GF. Regional differences in the thickness (cell layers) of the human stratum corneum: an ultrastructural analysis. J Invest Dermatol. 1974 Apr;62(4):415-22. doi: 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12701670. No abstract available.
Hadgraft J, Lane ME. Transepidermal water loss and skin site: a hypothesis. Int J Pharm. 2009 May 21;373(1-2):1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2009.02.007. Epub 2009 Feb 21.
Ya-Xian Z, Suetake T, Tagami H. Number of cell layers of the stratum corneum in normal skin - relationship to the anatomical location on the body, age, sex and physical parameters. Arch Dermatol Res. 1999 Oct;291(10):555-9. doi: 10.1007/s004030050453.
Fluhr JW, Dickel H, Kuss O, Weyher I, Diepgen TL, Berardesca E. Impact of anatomical location on barrier recovery, surface pH and stratum corneum hydration after acute barrier disruption. Br J Dermatol. 2002 May;146(5):770-6. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04695.x.
Breternitz M, Flach M, Prassler J, Elsner P, Fluhr JW. Acute barrier disruption by adhesive tapes is influenced by pressure, time and anatomical location: integrity and cohesion assessed by sequential tape stripping. A randomized, controlled study. Br J Dermatol. 2007 Feb;156(2):231-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07632.x.
Magnusson B, Hersle K. Patch test methods. II. Regional variations of patch test responses. Acta Derm Venereol. 1965;45(4):257-61. No abstract available.
Cua AB, Wilhelm KP, Maibach HI. Cutaneous sodium lauryl sulphate irritation potential: age and regional variability. Br J Dermatol. 1990 Nov;123(5):607-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb01477.x.
Feldmann RJ, Maibach HI. Regional variation in percutaneous penetration of 14C cortisol in man. J Invest Dermatol. 1967 Feb;48(2):181-3. doi: 10.1038/jid.1967.29. No abstract available.
Rougier A, Dupuis D, Lotte C, Roguet R, Wester RC, Maibach HI. Regional variation in percutaneous absorption in man: measurement by the stripping method. Arch Dermatol Res. 1986;278(6):465-9. doi: 10.1007/BF00455165.
Rougier A, Lotte C, Maibach HI. In vivo percutaneous penetration of some organic compounds related to anatomic site in humans: predictive assessment by the stripping method. J Pharm Sci. 1987 Jun;76(6):451-4. doi: 10.1002/jps.2600760608.
Machado M, Salgado TM, Hadgraft J, Lane ME. The relationship between transepidermal water loss and skin permeability. Int J Pharm. 2010 Jan 15;384(1-2):73-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2009.09.044. Epub 2009 Sep 30.
Leskur D, Bukic J, Petric A, Zekan L, Rusic D, Seselja Perisin A, Petric I, Stipic M, Puizina-Ivic N, Modun D. Anatomical site differences of sodium lauryl sulfate-induced irritation: randomized controlled trial. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Jul;181(1):175-185. doi: 10.1111/bjd.17633. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
003-08/17-03/0001
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id