ETHYLHEXYL TRIAZONE

Sunscreens have now been around for decades to mitigate the Sun's damaging ultraviolet (UV) radiation which, although essential for the existence of life, is a recognized prime carcinogen. Accordingly, have suncreams achieved their intended purposes towards protection against sunburns, skin photo-ageing and the like? Most importantly, however, have they provided the expected protection against skin cancers that current sunscreen products claim to do? In the last two decades, there have been tens, if not hundreds of studies on sunscreens with respect to skin protection against UVB (280‒320 nm)-traditionally sunscreens with rather low sun protection factors (SPF) were intended to protect against this type of radiation-and UVA (320‒400 nm) radiation; a distinction between SPF and UVA protection factor (UVA-PF) is made. Many of the studies of the last two decades have focused on protection against the more skin-penetrating UVA radiation. This non-exhaustive article reviews some of the important facets of what is currently known about sunscreens with regard (i) to the physical UV filters titanium dioxide (TiO 2 ) and zinc oxide (ZnO) and the mostly photo-unstable chemical UVB/UVA filters (e.g., octinoxate (OMC) and avobenzone (AVO), among others), (ii) to novel chemical sunscreen agents, (iii) to means that minimize the breakdown of chemical filters and improve their stability when exposed to UV sunlight, (iv) to SPF factors, and (v) to a short discussion on non-melanoma skin cancers and melanoma. Importantly, throughout the article we allude to the safety aspects of sunscreens and at the end ask the question: do active ingredients in sunscreen products pose a risk to human health, and what else can be done to enhance protection? Significant loss of skin protection from two well-known commercial suncreams when exposed to simulated UV sunlight. Cream I: titanium dioxide, ethylhexyl triazone, avobenzone, and octinoxate; Cream II: octyl salicylate, oxybenzone, avobenzone, and octinoxate.

The data available on the skin permeability of ethylhexyl triazone (EHT), a widely used high-molecular-weight (823.1-Da) UV filter, are scarce and obtained only via in vitro studies. Therefore, we evaluated in vivo the penetration of EHT in human stratum corneum by the tape stripping technique. Moreover, the effect of EHT encapsulation in lipid microparticles (LMs) on its diffusion through the stratum corneum was examined. LMs loaded with EHT were prepared using glyceryl behenate and phosphatidylcholine. Creams containing EHT free or encapsulated in LMs in conjunction with the two most commonly used UV filters, octyl methoxycinnamate (OMC) and butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane (BMDBM), were applied to human volunteers and the fraction of the applied sunscreen dose having penetrated into different stratum corneum layers was measured. For the cream with the nonencapsulated sunscreen agent, the percentage of the applied EHT dose diffused into the stratum corneum was 21.9 ± 4.9%, not significantly different from that of the smaller-molecular-weight OMC (22.2 ± 7.6%) and BMDBM (20.5 ± 3.7%). A marked (45.7%) and statistically significant reduction in the in vivo skin penetration of EHT was attained with the cream containing microencapsulated EHT. The decreased percutaneous penetration provided by the LMs should favor the efficacy of EHT and limit potential toxicological risks.

Ethylhexyl triazone (ET) was separated from other sunscreens such as avobenzone, octocrylene, octyl methoxycinnamate, and diethylamino hydroxybenzoyl hexyl benzoate and from parabens by normal-phase HPTLC on silica gel 60 as stationary phase. Two mobile phases were particularly effective: (A) cyclohexane-diethyl ether 1 : 1 (v/v) and (B) cyclohexane-diethyl ether-acetone 15 : 1 : 2 (v/v/v) since apart from ET analysis they facilitated separation and quantification of other sunscreens present in the formulations. Densitometric scanning was performed at 300 nm. Calibration curves for ET were nonlinear (second-degree polynomials), with R > 0.998. For both mobile phases limits of detection (LOD) were 0.03 and limits of quantification (LOQ) 0.1 μg spot(-1). Both methods were validated.

In recent years, the demand for high-quality solar products that combine high efficacy with environmentally friendly characteristics has increased. Among the coral-safe sunscreens, ethylhexyl triazone (Uvinul ® T150) is an effective organic UVB filter, photostable and practically insoluble in water, therefore difficult to be formulated in water-based products. Oil-free sunscreens are considered ideal for most skin types, as they are not comedogenic and do not leave the skin feeling greasy. Recent studies reported that pollen grains might represent innovative drug delivery systems for their ability to encapsulate and release active ingredients in a controlled manner. Before being used, the pollen grains must be treated to remove cellular material and biomolecules, which could cause allergic reactions in predisposed subjects; the obtained hollow structures possess uniform diameter and a rigid wall with openings that allow them to be filled with bioactive substances. In the present work, pollen from Lycopodium clavatum has been investigated both as a delivery system for ethylhexyl triazone and as an active ingredient by evaluating its photoprotective capacity. The goal is to obtain environmentally friendly solar aqueous formulations that take advantage of both sunscreen and sporopollenin microcapsules' UV protection with a relatively low cost, as these pollen grains are widely available.

Previous studies showed that the common UV filter substances benzophenone-3 (BP-3), butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane (BM-DBM), octocrylene (OCR), ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate (EHMC), ethylhexyl salicylate (EHS) and ethylhexyl triazone (EHT) were able to react with amino side chains of different proteins in vitro. To transfer the results to mammalian skin conditions, sunscreen products were applied on both prepared fresh porcine skin and glass plates, followed by UV irradiation and the determination of depletion of the respective UV filters. Significantly lower recoveries of the UV filters extracted from skin samples than from glass plates indicated the additional reaction of the UV filters with skin constituents, when proteins will be the most important reactants. Among the products tested, BP-3 showed the greatest differences in recoveries between glass and skin samples of about 13% and 24% after 2 and 4 h of irradiation, respectively, followed by EHS > BM-DBM > OCR > EHMC > EHT. The obtained results raise the question, whether the common in vitro evaluations of sunscreens, using inert substrate materials like roughened quartz or polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) plates are really suitable to fully replace in vivo methods, as they cannot include skin-typical reactions.