<clinical_study>
  <!-- This xml conforms to an XML Schema at:
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/html/images/info/public.xsd -->
  <required_header>
    <download_date>ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023</download_date>
    <link_text>Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.</link_text>
    <url>https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03231813</url>
  </required_header>
  <id_info>
    <org_study_id>003-08/17-03/0001</org_study_id>
    <nct_id>NCT03231813</nct_id>
  </id_info>
  <brief_title>Regional Differences of Cutaneous Irritation and Its Effect on Skin Barrier Recovery</brief_title>
  <official_title>Regional Differences of Cutaneous Irritation and Its Effect on Skin Barrier Recovery: A Randomised, Controlled Trial</official_title>
  <sponsors>
    <lead_sponsor>
      <agency>University of Split, School of Medicine</agency>
      <agency_class>Other</agency_class>
    </lead_sponsor>
  </sponsors>
  <source>University of Split, School of Medicine</source>
  <oversight_info>
    <has_dmc>No</has_dmc>
    <is_fda_regulated_drug>No</is_fda_regulated_drug>
    <is_fda_regulated_device>No</is_fda_regulated_device>
  </oversight_info>
  <brief_summary>
    <textblock>
      Irritant contact dermatitis induced by sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) is often used as a model&#xD;
      for testing efficacy of various topical preparations. Aforementioned model is standardized&#xD;
      and described in guidelines, but it is not explicitly stated where the irritation should be&#xD;
      induced. Published clinical trials usually irritate volar aspect of forearms or upper back.&#xD;
      Also, lower back and dorsal aspect of forearm are sometimes used.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Skin parameters vary depending on anatomic location of measured skin. There is a difference&#xD;
      in stratum corneum thickness, hydration and transepidermal water loss across different&#xD;
      locations, including between volar forearm and upper back.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Furthermore, regional difference in skin response to irritation by tape stripping and&#xD;
      benzalkonium chloride were observed. Such differences are also possible in SLS irritation&#xD;
      model. One study has shown higher, but not statistically significant, response of back in&#xD;
      comparison to forearms, but it had a very small sample size (n=9).&#xD;
&#xD;
      Moreover, there are regional variations of topical preparations absorption. Hydrocortisone&#xD;
      had 1,7 times higher absorption when applied to upper back in comparison to forearms. Those&#xD;
      variations could be explained by different corneocyte size and number of their layers between&#xD;
      back and hands.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Skin baseline properties and response to irritation seem to be dependent on anatomic&#xD;
      position. Those differences could mean different response to treatment. Since published&#xD;
      trials only tested efficacy of various preparations on one anatomic location, it is possible&#xD;
      their results would be different if tested on other body parts. It could limit validity and&#xD;
      usefulness of conducted trials. The aim of this study is to determine if there are regional&#xD;
      differences of skin response to irritation and emollient cream treatment in irritant contact&#xD;
      dermatitis model.&#xD;
    </textblock>
  </brief_summary>
  <overall_status>Completed</overall_status>
  <start_date type="Actual">August 29, 2017</start_date>
  <completion_date type="Actual">September 28, 2017</completion_date>
  <primary_completion_date type="Actual">September 28, 2017</primary_completion_date>
  <phase>N/A</phase>
  <study_type>Interventional</study_type>
  <has_expanded_access>No</has_expanded_access>
  <study_design_info>
    <allocation>Randomized</allocation>
    <intervention_model>Single Group Assignment</intervention_model>
    <primary_purpose>Other</primary_purpose>
    <masking>None (Open Label)</masking>
  </study_design_info>
  <primary_outcome>
    <measure>Transepidermal water loss</measure>
    <time_frame>Five measurements; baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment</time_frame>
    <description>Tewameter will be used to assess skin barrier function as a measurement of the water loss (g/hm2).</description>
  </primary_outcome>
  <primary_outcome>
    <measure>Stratum corneum hydration</measure>
    <time_frame>Five measurements; baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment</time_frame>
    <description>Corneometer will be used to estimate skin dryness. It is a relative measurement and uses arbitrary units (AU).</description>
  </primary_outcome>
  <primary_outcome>
    <measure>Erythema</measure>
    <time_frame>Five measurements; baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment</time_frame>
    <description>Mexameter will be used to assess erythema. It is a relative measurement and uses arbitrary units (AU).</description>
  </primary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Clinical score</measure>
    <time_frame>Five assessments: baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment</time_frame>
    <description>Skin response to irritation and treatment will be assessed using a five-point scale to describe changes in skin erythema, roughness, scaling, oedema, and fissures.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <number_of_arms>4</number_of_arms>
  <enrollment type="Actual">25</enrollment>
  <condition>Irritant Contact Dermatitis</condition>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>SLS irritation model and Treatment</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Experimental</arm_group_type>
    <description>SLS induced irritation on two sites each on forearms and back Emollient cream treatment</description>
  </arm_group>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>SLS irritation model and No Treatment</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Placebo Comparator</arm_group_type>
    <description>SLS induced irritation on two sites each on forearms and back No treatment</description>
  </arm_group>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>Sham irritation and Treatment</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Sham Comparator</arm_group_type>
    <description>Sham irritation (water) on two sites each on forearms and back Emollient cream treatment</description>
  </arm_group>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>Sham irritation and No Treatment</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>No Intervention</arm_group_type>
    <description>Sham irritation (water) on two sites each on forearms and back No treatment</description>
  </arm_group>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Procedure</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Sodium lauryl sulphate induced irritation</intervention_name>
    <description>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.</description>
    <arm_group_label>SLS irritation model and No Treatment</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_label>SLS irritation model and Treatment</arm_group_label>
  </intervention>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Other</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Emollient, moisturizing cream</intervention_name>
    <description>Commercially available topical emollient cream will be applied by each participant to treatment sites according to randomization protocol.</description>
    <arm_group_label>SLS irritation model and Treatment</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_label>Sham irritation and Treatment</arm_group_label>
  </intervention>
  <eligibility>
    <criteria>
      <textblock>
        Inclusion Criteria:&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  young, healthy volunteers who gave written informed consent&#xD;
&#xD;
        Exclusion Criteria:&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  skin disease, skin damage on measurement sites, use of corticosteroids and&#xD;
             immunomodulators a month prior the inclusion and during the trial, use of emollients&#xD;
             three days prior the inclusion in the trial, non-adherence to the trial protocol,&#xD;
             exposure to artificial UV radiation, pregnancy and lactation&#xD;
      </textblock>
    </criteria>
    <gender>All</gender>
    <minimum_age>18 Years</minimum_age>
    <maximum_age>35 Years</maximum_age>
    <healthy_volunteers>Accepts Healthy Volunteers</healthy_volunteers>
  </eligibility>
  <overall_official>
    <last_name>Dario Leskur, MPharm</last_name>
    <role>Principal Investigator</role>
    <affiliation>University of Split, School of Medicine</affiliation>
  </overall_official>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>School of Medicine</name>
      <address>
        <city>Split</city>
        <zip>21000</zip>
        <country>Croatia</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
  </location>
  <location_countries>
    <country>Croatia</country>
  </location_countries>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>9285167</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>1845280</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>9740228</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>7493454</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>19099543</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>26333046</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>22507039</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>7867323</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>8458202</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>2095179</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>21912200</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>27327221</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>4820685</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>19429281</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>10552214</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>12000372</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>17223861</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>4162958</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>2248890</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>6020682</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>3789805</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>3625489</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>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.</citation>
    <PMID>19799976</PMID>
  </reference>
  <verification_date>June 2017</verification_date>
  <study_first_submitted>July 24, 2017</study_first_submitted>
  <study_first_submitted_qc>July 24, 2017</study_first_submitted_qc>
  <study_first_posted type="Actual">July 27, 2017</study_first_posted>
  <last_update_submitted>September 28, 2017</last_update_submitted>
  <last_update_submitted_qc>September 28, 2017</last_update_submitted_qc>
  <last_update_posted type="Actual">October 2, 2017</last_update_posted>
  <responsible_party>
    <responsible_party_type>Sponsor</responsible_party_type>
  </responsible_party>
  <keyword>irritant contact dermatitis</keyword>
  <keyword>sodium lauryl sulphate</keyword>
  <keyword>emollients</keyword>
  <keyword>transepidermal water loss</keyword>
  <condition_browse>
    <!-- CAUTION:  The following MeSH terms are assigned with an imperfect algorithm            -->
    <mesh_term>Dermatitis</mesh_term>
    <mesh_term>Dermatitis, Contact</mesh_term>
    <mesh_term>Dermatitis, Irritant</mesh_term>
  </condition_browse>
  <intervention_browse>
    <!-- CAUTION:  The following MeSH terms are assigned with an imperfect algorithm            -->
    <mesh_term>Emollients</mesh_term>
  </intervention_browse>
  <patient_data>
    <sharing_ipd>Undecided</sharing_ipd>
  </patient_data>
  <!-- Results have not yet been posted for this study                                          -->
</clinical_study>


download date: ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023
link text: Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
url: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03231813
org study id: 003-08/17-03/0001
nct id: NCT03231813
lead sponsor: 
has dmc: No
is fda regulated drug: No
is fda regulated device: No
Irritant contact dermatitis induced by sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) is often used as a model
      for testing efficacy of various topical preparations. Aforementioned model is standardized
      and described in guidelines, but it is not explicitly stated where the irritation should be
      induced. Published clinical trials usually irritate volar aspect of forearms or upper back.
      Also, lower back and dorsal aspect of forearm are sometimes used.

      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.
allocation: Randomized
intervention model: Single Group Assignment
primary purpose: Other
masking: None (Open Label)
measure: Transepidermal water loss
time frame: Five measurements; baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment
description: Tewameter will be used to assess skin barrier function as a measurement of the water loss (g/hm2).
measure: Stratum corneum hydration
time frame: Five measurements; baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment
description: Corneometer will be used to estimate skin dryness. It is a relative measurement and uses arbitrary units (AU).
measure: Erythema
time frame: Five measurements; baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment
description: Mexameter will be used to assess erythema. It is a relative measurement and uses arbitrary units (AU).
measure: Clinical score
time frame: Five assessments: baseline, irritation, first, third and ninth day of treatment
description: Skin response to irritation and treatment will be assessed using a five-point scale to describe changes in skin erythema, roughness, scaling, oedema, and fissures.
arm group label: SLS irritation model and Treatment
arm group type: Experimental
description: SLS induced irritation on two sites each on forearms and back Emollient cream treatment
arm group label: SLS irritation model and No Treatment
arm group type: Placebo Comparator
description: SLS induced irritation on two sites each on forearms and back No treatment
arm group label: Sham irritation and Treatment
arm group type: Sham Comparator
description: Sham irritation (water) on two sites each on forearms and back Emollient cream treatment
arm group label: Sham irritation and No Treatment
arm group type: No Intervention
description: Sham irritation (water) on two sites each on forearms and back No treatment
intervention type: Procedure
intervention name: Sodium lauryl sulphate induced irritation
description: 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.
arm group label: SLS irritation model and No Treatment
arm group label: SLS irritation model and Treatment
intervention type: Other
intervention name: Emollient, moisturizing cream
description: Commercially available topical emollient cream will be applied by each participant to treatment sites according to randomization protocol.
arm group label: SLS irritation model and Treatment
arm group label: Sham irritation and Treatment
criteria: 
gender: All
minimum age: 18 Years
maximum age: 35 Years
healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
last name: Dario Leskur, MPharm
role: Principal Investigator
affiliation: University of Split, School of Medicine
facility: 
country: Croatia
citation: 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.
PMID: 9285167
citation: 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.
PMID: 1845280
citation: 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.
PMID: 9740228
citation: 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.
PMID: 7493454
citation: 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.
PMID: 19099543
citation: 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.
PMID: 26333046
citation: 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.
PMID: 22507039
citation: 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.
PMID: 7867323
citation: 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.
PMID: 8458202
citation: 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.
PMID: 2095179
citation: 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.
PMID: 21912200
citation: 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.
PMID: 27327221
citation: 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.
PMID: 4820685
citation: 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.
PMID: 19429281
citation: 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.
PMID: 10552214
citation: 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.
PMID: 12000372
citation: 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.
PMID: 17223861
citation: 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.
PMID: 4162958
citation: 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.
PMID: 2248890
citation: 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.
PMID: 6020682
citation: 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.
PMID: 3789805
citation: 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.
PMID: 3625489
citation: 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.
PMID: 19799976
responsible party type: Sponsor
mesh term: Dermatitis
mesh term: Dermatitis, Contact
mesh term: Dermatitis, Irritant
mesh term: Emollients
sharing ipd: Undecided