It is known that ultraviolet (UV) radiation causes irreversible skin changes and DNA damage resulting in premature aging and increased risk of skin cancer.

Skin cancer, including melanoma and non-melanoma types, represents a major public health problem as it is the most common cancer of all types of cancers according to the American Cancer Society. The statistics is concerning: more than 3.5 million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed and more than 2.2 million people are treated for skin cancer in the U.S. alone each year. According to the National Council on Skin Cancer Prevention one in five Americans will develop skin cancer in the course of a lifetime.

However, the UV light accounts for only 5 % in the Solar radiation, while the visible and infrared light constitute the remaining 95 %. The visible (VIS) and infrared (IR) light rays penetrate deeper in the skin than the UV rays passing through the dermis into the subcutaneous tissue.

Light Beyond UV: Visible and Infrared Light

Visible (VIS) light, especially the violet-blue high energy visible (HEV) light, has been shown to cause indirect DNA damage via generation of free radicals (reactive oxygen species, ROS) and oxidative stress. In fact, 50 % of the generated ROS in the skin during Sun exposure have been associated with the VIS light portion of the Solar radiation. In addition to the ROS accumulation, HEV light increases the risk of skin inflammation and immunosuppression, delays the epidermal barrier recovery, promotes the collagen degradation and generates uneven long lasting hyperpigmentation, thus, advances the premature aging. The infrared (IR) light, particularly IRA light, despite its lower energy, is also considered as a significant contributor to the formation of free radicals in the skin mostly due to the associated heat generation. Prolonged heat activation of the skin can lead to skin inflammation, elastosis and dermal collagen breakdown. Therefore, the VIS and IRA light are most likely to have long term consequences on skin health and skin appearance, if their relative abundance in the Solar radiation and their deeper dermal penetration are taken into account.

Outdoor and Indoor Sources of Light Beyond UV

REMEMBER: The relative abundance of VIS and IR light in the Solar radiation and their deeper penetration in the skin are most likely to have long term consequences on the skin health and skin appearance.

Outdoors:

  • Solar radiation: 95 % VIS + IR light, of which approx. 30 % is HEV light

Indoors:

  • Energy-efficient artificial light sources
    • LEDs and CFLs have more than 30 % HEV light emission
  • Electronic devices
    • Smart phones, laptops, TV screens, computer monitors emit more than 30 % HEV light

What do Statistics Tell Us?

Light Beyond the UV is Damaging For the Skin

Scientific evidence shows that the non-UV light affects the skin health and skin appearance mainly via generation of free radicals and oxidative stress resulting in premature skin aging and increased risk of skin cancer.

HEV and IRA light have been also associated with induced skin inflammation, immuno-suppression, hyper-pigmentation, elastosis and collagen breakdown.

CSI Formulations Provide Protection Beyond UV

  • CSI active ingredients and formulations, majority of them of natural and organic origin, provide tunable light shielding in HEV spectral range.
  • CSI formulations exhibit pronounced antioxidant capability to
    • prevent the generation of new free radicals and
    • neutralize wide spectrum of already existing free radicals.

Existing Sunscreen Products

Most of the existing sunscreens block the light below 380 nm, thus do not protect in long UVA range and HEV spectral range, where CSI technology can provide a protection.

CSI Light Shielding vs. Commercial Sunscreens

UV-VIS absorption spectra of CSI formulations and commercial sunscreens.

CSI formulations extend the protection range beyond UV

CSI Antioxidant (Free-Radical-Scavenging) Activity

in vitro  tests:

  • Exposure of a model cell system with a strong blue LED light significantly increases the free radical level by 143 % compared to the control group.
  • When the model cell system (without being irradiated) was treated with CSI-5 and CSI-6 formulations, the formulations displayed strong antioxidant activity decreasing the free radical level by 60-70 %.
  • When the model system was treated with the CSI-5 and CSI-6 formulations and irradiated with strong blue LED light, the results showed that CSI-5 and CSI-6 decreased the free radicals level generated by the blue light exposure by 93 % and 94 %, respectively.

CSI formulations protect from new-generated free radicals due to the blue light exposure.

CSI Technology Offering Protection Beyond UV

CSI is offering the IP related to the Protection Beyond UV for licensing

References

  1. S.Q. Wang, H.W.Lim (Eds), Principles and Practice of Photoprotection, Springer International Publishing, 2016.
  2. E. Dupont, J. Gomez and D. Bilodeau, Beyond UV radiation: A skin under challenge, Int. J. Cosm. Sci., 2013, 1–9.
  3. P. Schroeder et al. Photoprotection beyond UV irradiation – Effective sun protection has to include protection against IRA radiation-induced skin damage, Skin Pharmacol. Physiol. 2010, 23, 15-17.
  4. L. R. Sklar et al. Effects of ultraviolet radiation, visible light, and infrared radiation on erythema and pigmentation: a review, Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2013, 12,54–64.
  5. S. Grether-Beck et al., Photoprotection of human skin beyond ultraviolet radiation, Photodermatol Photoimmunol & Photomed2014; 30: 167–174.
  6. Zastrow et al. Light – instead of UV protection: new requirements for skin cancer prevention, Anticancer Research 36: 1389-1394 (2016)
  7. G. Monfrecola et al., The effect of visible blue light on the differentiation of dendritic cells in vitro, Biochimie 101 (2014) 252-255.
  8. S. Vandersee et al. Blue-Violet Light Irradiation Dose Dependently Decreases Carotenoids in Human Skin, Which Indicates the Generation of Free Radicals, Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, 2015, Article ID 579675.
  9. F. Liebel et al., Irradiation of Skin with Visible Light Induces Reactive Oxygen Species and Matrix-Degrading Enzymes, Journal of Investigative Dermatology (2012) 132, 1901–1907.
  10. M. F. Holick, Biological Effects of Sunlight, Ultraviolet Radiation, Visible Light, Infrared Radiation and Vitamin D for Health, Anticancer Research, 36: 1345-1356 (2016).
  11. M. M. Kleinpenning et al., Clinical and histological effects of blue light on normal skin, Photodermatology, Photoimmunology & Photomedicine, 26, 16–21, 2010.
  12. C. Opländer et al., Effects of blue light irradiation on human dermal fibroblasts, Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology 103 (2011) 118–125.
  13. J. Liebmann et al., Blue-Light Irradiation Regulates Proliferation and Differentiation in Human Skin Cells, Journal of Investigative Dermatology (2010) 130, 259–269.
  14. Zastrow L. et al. UV, visible and infrared light. Which wavelengths produce oxidative stress in human skin?,Hautarzt 2009 · 60:310–317
  15. A. Mamalis et al. Light Emitting Diode-Generated Blue Light Modulates Fibrosis Characteristics: Fibroblast Proliferation, Migration Speed, and Reactive Oxygen Species Generation, Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 47:210–215 (2015).
  16. C. Opländer et al, Mechanism and biological relevance of blue-light (420–453 nm)-induced nonenzymatic nitric oxide generation from photolabile nitric oxide derivates in human skin in vitro and in vivo, Free Radical Biology and Medicine 65 (2013) 1363–1377.
  17. L. Kolbe, How Much Sun Protection Is Needed?: Are We on the Way To Full-Spectrum Protection?, The Journal of Investigative Dermatology (2012), Volume 132, 1756-1757.
  18. Robert, C. et al. Low to moderate doses of Infrared A Irradiation impair extracellular matrix homeostasis of the skin and contribute to skin photodamage, Skin Pharmacol. Physiol. 2015, 28, 196-204.
  19. P.Schroeder et al. Infrared Radiation-Induced Matrix Metalloproteinase in Human Skin: Implications for Protection, Journal of Investigative Dermatology (2008) 128, 2491–2497.
  20. Mi-Sun Kim et al Regulation of type I procollagen and MMP-1 expression after single or repeated exposure to infrared radiation in human skin, Mechanisms of Ageing and Development 127 (2006) 875–882
  21. L. Knels et al. Effects of Narrow-band IR-A and of Water-Filtered Infrared A on Fibroblasts, Photochemistry and Photobiology, 2016, 92: 475–487
  22. Daniel Barolet et al., Infrared and skin: Friend or foe, Journal of Photochemistry & Photobiology, B: Biology 155 (2016) 78–85
  23. C-H. Lee et al. Differential immunological effects of infrared irradiation and its associated heat in vivo, Journal of Photochemistry & Photobiology, B: Biology 155 (2016) 98–103
  24. S. Cho et al. Effects of Infrared Radiation and Heat on Human Skin Aging in vivo, Journal of Investigative Dermatology Symposium Proceedings (2009) 14, 15–19
  25. Christian Calles et al. Infrared A Radiation Influences the Skin Fibroblast Transcriptome: Mechanisms and Consequences, Journal of Investigative Dermatology (2010) 130, 1524–1536
  26. A. M. Holzer et al. The Other End of the Rainbow: Infrared and Skin, J Invest Dermatol. 2010; 130(6): 1496–1499.
  27. P. Schroeder, J. Krutmann., IRA protection. Needs and possibilities, Hautarzt 2009 · 60:301–304
  28. M. Rinnerthaler, et al. Oxidative Stress in Aging Human Skin Biomolecules 2015, 5, 545-589.
  29. B. Poljsak, et al. Skin cancer, free radicals and antioxidants, Inter Journal of Cancer research and Prevention, Vol 4, No 3, 2011
  30. L. S. Kozina et al.  Role of Oxidative Stress in Skin Aging, Advances in Gerontology, 2013, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 18–22
  31. H. Masaki, Role of antioxidants in the skin: Anti-aging effects, Journal of Dermatological Science 58 (2010) 85–90
  32. Lucy Chen et al., The role of antioxidants in photoprotection: A critical Review, J Am Acad Dermatol 2012;67:1013-24

Create. Solve. Innovate. ®