Patent Grant
8945521
1. Field of the Disclosure
The present disclosure relates to enhancing the photoactivity, such as the sun protection factor (SPF), and/or the UVA (ultraviolet-A) and/or UVB (ultraviolet-B) absorption, of semiconductors that behave as physical sunscreens. In particular, the present disclosure relates to enhancing the photoactivity of physical sunscreens by placing the sunscreens in a composition with one or more compounds that exhibit minimal, if any, photoactivity on their own. The physical sunscreens may also be subsequently placed in photoprotective compositions that include additional sunscreens.
2. Description of the Related Art
It is always a goal in the field of suncare to either use less sunscreen active material while maintaining a desired level of SPF and/or UVA absorption, or to achieve a very high SPF or UVA absorption rate overall. Thus, there is a need for a way of enhancing the photoactivity of semiconductor materials, which can boost the SPF, and/or UVA absorption of these materials.
The present disclosure provides a composition (e.g., a dispersion or emulsion) of one or more physical sunscreens and/or one or more adjuvants. The one or more adjuvants are selected from the group consisting of ethylhexyl methoxycrylene (or derivatives thereof), compounds having multiple phenyl rings, silicone surfactant, a film former/dispersant, carrier oil, and any combinations thereof. The carrier oil may be aromatic or non-aromatic. The compositions of the present disclosure can take the form of oil-in-water emulsion, water-in-oil emulsion, or an oily liquid that is not an emulsion. They can also be in the form of a cream, lotion, liquid or stick composition.
In one exemplary embodiment, the composition comprises a physical sunscreen, ethylhexyl methoxycrylene, a compound having multiple phenyl rings, and an aromatic and/or non-aromatic carrier oil.
In another exemplary embodiment, the composition comprises a physical sunscreen that is complexed with a silicone surfactant, and an aromatic and/or non-aromatic carrier oil. In a further embodiment of this composition, the composition also has a compound having multiple phenyl rings.
In a further exemplary embodiment, the composition comprises a physical sunscreen that is complexed with a silicone surfactant, ethylhexyl methoxycrylene, and an aromatic and/or non-aromatic carrier oil. In further embodiment of this composition, the composition also has a compound having multiple phenyl rings.
In a still further exemplary embodiment, the composition has ethylhexyl methoxycrylene and a film former/dispersant.
In a yet further exemplary embodiment, the composition comprises a physical sunscreen that is either plain or complexed with a silicone surfactant, a film former/dispersant, and an aromatic and/or non-aromatic carrier oil. In a further embodiment of this composition, the composition also has ethylhexyl methoxycrylene, and a compound having multiple phenyl rings.
In another exemplary embodiment, the composition comprises a physical sunscreen that is complexed with a silicone surfactant, ethylhexyl methoxycrylene, a film former/dispersant, and an aromatic and/or non-aromatic carrier oil.
In another exemplary embodiment, the present disclosure provides composition comprising 0.5% w/w to 30% w/w of a physical sunscreen, 0.1% w/w to 6.0% w/w of ethylhexyl methoxycrylene, a carrier oil, and at least one of a compound having multiple phenyl groups, a silicone surfactant, and a dispersant.
In another exemplary embodiment, the present disclosure provides a composition comprising 0.5% w/w to 30% w/w of a physical sunscreen selected from the group consisting of titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, coated zinc oxide, or a combination thereof, 0.1% w/w to 6.0% w/w of ethylhexyl methoxycrylene, 0.2% w/w to 1.0% w/w of a compound having multiple phenyl groups selected from the group consisting of benzene sulfonic acids, salts of benzene sulfonic acids, styrenic block copolymers with a hydrogenated midblock of styrene-ethylene /butylene-styrene, styrenic block copolymers with a hydrogenated midblock of styrene-ethylene/propylene-styrene, styrene/butadiene/styrene block copolymers, styrene/isoprene/styrene block copolymers, ethylene/butadiene/styrene block copolymer, ethylene/propylene/styrene block copolymer, styrene/ethylene/butylene block copolymer, styrene/propylene/butadiene block copolymer, and derivatives or combinations thereof, and a carrier oil.
The present disclosure has unexpectedly discovered that when one or more physical sunscreens and/or one or more adjuvants are combined, the photoactivity of the physical sunscreens and/or adjuvants are greatly enhanced. As is discussed in greater detail below, this result is surprising in that the one or more additional components exhibit very little, if any, photoactivity on their own.
to A “synergistic effect” is defined as the difference in an observed property between a combination of elements, and the sum of the values of that property for each of those elements individually. For example, a synergistic effect on the SPF of a sunscreen composition is observed when the SPF of the composition is greater than the sum of the SPF values for each of the ingredients in the composition.
The physical sunscreen can be any compound that at least partially physically blocks UVR, although it may absorb UVR as well. Suitable physical sunscreens for the compositions of the present disclosure can be one or more semiconductors selected from the group recited in the Wikipedia page, “List of semiconductor materials,” found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_materials, which is herein incorporated by reference. In one embodiment, the physical sunscreen is titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, complexed zinc oxide, or a combination thereof. In a further embodiment, such as those shown below in the experimental data, the sunscreen is zinc oxide.
The physical sunscreen can be present in an amount of from 0.5% w/w to 30% w/w based on the total weight of the composition, or any subranges in between. The zinc oxide can be in the powder form, such as that sold under the trade name Zano® 10, from Umicore. An example of complexed zinc oxide is Zano® 10 Plus, also from Umicore. Titanium dioxide is sold under the trade names Kemira UV Titan, or those available from Kobo. Many other trade names for treated and plain zinc oxide and titanium dioxide exist, as listed in the International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook.
Ethylhexyl methoxycrylene (EHM), sold under the trade name Solastay® S1 by Hallstar, or derivatives thereof can be present in the composition. EHM can be present in an amount of from 0.1% w/w to 6.0% w/w, based on the total weight of the composition, from 0.2% w/w to 2.0% w/w based on the total weight of the composition, from 0.5% w/w to 2.0% w/w based on the total weight of the composition, or any subranges in between.
The compounds having multiple phenyl compounds can be selected from: benzene sulfonic acids or salts thereof, styrenic block copolymers with a hydrogenated midblock of styrene-ethylene/butylene-styrene (SEBS), styrenic block copolymers with a hydrogenated midblock of styrene-ethylene/propylene-styrene (SEPS), styrene/butadiene/styrene (SBS) block copolymers, styrene/isoprene/styrene (SIS) block copolymers, an ethylene/butadiene/styrene (EBS) block copolymer, an ethylene/propylene/styrene (EPS) block copolymer, styrene/ethylene/butylene (SEB) block copolymer, styrene/propylene/butadiene (SPB) block copolymer, and any derivatives, or any combinations thereof. Examples of the SEBS, SEPS, SBS, SIS, EBS, EPS, SEB, and SPB block copolymers are the Kraton® D and Kraton® G series from Kraton Polymers. In one embodiment, the compound having multiple phenyl groups is the SEB block copolymer, sold under the trade name Kraton® G1650. An example of a benzene sulfonic acid salt is sodium polystyrene benzene sulfonate (available, for example, as Flexan® II, from AzkoNobel).
The compound with multiple phenyl groups can be present in an amount of from 0.1% w/w to 4.0% w/w, based on the total weight of the composition, from 0.2% w/w to 1.0% w/w, based on the total weight of the composition, from 0.25% w/w to 0.5% w/w, based on the total weight of the composition, or any subranges in between.
In one embodiment, the silicone surfactant can be lauryl polyethylene glycol (PEG)-8 dimethicone. Examples include Silube® J208-612 and J208-812, sold by Siltech LLC. The differences between the two types are discussed in greater detail below. The silicone surfactants of the present disclosure may also include variations of the lauryl PEG-8 dimethicone where the PEG group is up to and including PEG-20. In addition, the polypropylene oxide (PPO) and the PEG/PPO variations of the dimethicone may be used. Any of these compounds may be straight chain, have increased alkyl chain length, and/or can be branched, saturated or unsaturated, or aromatic. The silicone surfactant may be present in an amount of from 0.1% w/w to 10.0% w/w based on the total weight of the composition, or any subranges in between.
In one embodiment, the film former/dispersant can be octyldodecyl-propyl-citrate. One commercially available example is Cosmosurf® CE100, available from SurfaTech. The film former/dispersant can be present in an amount of from 0.5% w/w to 20% w/w based on the total weight of the composition, or any subranges in between. Octyldodecyl-propyl-citrate can also exhibit adjuvating activity.
The carrier oil can be one or more oils suitable for the purpose of allowing the phenyl compounds to interact with the semiconductors in the manner discussed below. In one embodiment, the carrier oil can be one or more esters. The esters can be benzoate or non-benzoate esters, with alkyl chain lengths that are branched or non-branched. In another embodiment, the carrier oils used in this disclosure can be those with low polarity that do not exhibit meaningful SPF, such as mineral oil and isopropyl myristate. The carrier oils can also be those with comparatively higher polarity and measurable SPF, such as butyloctyl salicyclate and ethylhexyl salicyclate, the latter of which is also known as octisalate. Examples of commercially available esters suitable for use in the composition of the present disclosure include, but are not limited to, the Finsolv® benzoate esters available from Innospec Active Chemicals, the Schercemol® or Hydramol® esters available from the Lubrizol Corporation, or the Crodamol® esters available from Croda Worldwide. In general, carrier oils can be aromatic and/or non-aromatic esters, and aromatic and/or nonaromatic hydrocarbon liquids. Nonaromatic versions can include straight and/or branched hydrocarbon chains, and saturated and/or unsaturated hydrocarbon chains.
The amount of carrier oil used in the composition will depend on the amounts of the other ingredients. In one embodiment, the amount of carrier oil that will be present in the composition is the remainder after any or all of the ingredients above are incorporated into the composition. The amount of carrier oil may also be such that another carrier may be used, such as water. In one embodiment, the carrier oil is present in an amount of 5-95% w/w, based on the total weight of the emulsion or other type of photoprotective composition, or any subranges in between.
The compositions of the present disclosure can be further used in conjunction with compositions containing organic sunscreens, as the compositions of the present disclosure may enhance the photoactivity of those sunscreens as well as the physical sunscreens discussed above. Suitable organic sunscreens may include, but are not limited to, cinnamates, octisalate, p-aminobenzoic acid, its salts and its derivatives (ethyl, isobutyl, glyceryl esters; p-d imethylaminobenzoic acid); anthranilates (o-aminobenzoates; methyl, menthyl, phenyl, benzyl, phenylethyl, linalyl, terpinyl, and cyclohexenyl esters), salicylates (octyl, amyl, phenyl, benzyl, menthyl(homosalate), glyceryl, and dipropyleneglycol esters), cinnamic acid derivatives (menthyl and benzyl esters, alpha-phenyl cinnamonitrile; butyl cinnamoyl pyruvate), dihydroxycinnamic acid derivatives (umbelliferone, methylumbelliferone, methylaceto-umbelliferone), camphor derivatives (3-benzylidene, 4-methylbenzylidene, polyacrylamidomethyl benzylidene, benzalkonium methosulfate, benzylidene camphor sulfonic acid, and terephthalylidene dicamphor sulfonic acid), trihydroxycinnamic acid derivatives (esculetin, methylesculetin, daphnetin, and the glucosides, esculin and daphnin), hydrocarbons (diphenylbutadiene, stilbene), dibenzalacetone and benzalacetophenone, naptholsulfonates (sodium salts of 2-naphthol-3,6-disulfonic and of 2-naphthol-6,8-disulfonic acids), dihydroxy-naphthoic acid and its salts, o- and p-hydroxydiphenyldisulfonates, coumarin derivatives (7-hydroxy, 7-methyl, 3-phenyl), diazoles (2-acetyl-3-bromoindazole, phenyl benzoxazole, methyl naphthoxazole, various aryl benzothiazoles), quinine salts (bisulfate, sulfate, chloride, oleate, and tannate), quinoline derivatives (8-hydroxyquinoline salts, 2-phenylquinoline), hydroxy- or methoxy-substituted benzophenones, uric and vilouric acids, tannic acid and its derivatives, hydroquinone, benzophenones (oxybenzone, sulisobenzone, dioxybenzone, benzoresorcinol, 2,2′,4,4′-tetrahydroxybenzophenone, 2,2′-dihydroxy-4,4′-dimethoxybenzophenone, octabenzone), dibenzoylmethane derivatives, avobenzone, 4-isopropyldibenzoylmethane, butylmethoxydibenzoylmethane, 4-isopropyl-dibenzoylmethane, octocrylene, drometrizole trisiloxane, bemotrizinol (sold under the trade name Tinasorb®), ecamsule (sold under the trade name Mexoryl®), and any combinations thereof.
Data illustrating the benefits of the above-described embodiments of the composition of the present disclosure are shown below. For convenience's sake, the compounds are referred to by their trade names.
Materials Used
The in-vitro SPF was determined using the Labsphere 2000S UV Transmittance Analyzer and PMMA roughened surface substrates. Exceptions and dose amounts are noted at the bottom of the Tables. The Labsphere uses a xenon flashlamp supplying sufficient energy for the spectral range of 250-450 nm.
The in-vivo data was generated using an outside testing facility; FDA monograph; 3 subject panels; static testing only.
Solvent polarity was determined using the Scientifica 870 Liquid Dielectric Constant Meter.
Study 1
In a cursory study to identify active agents causing the synergy, a series of dispersions were prepared for UVR absorption analyses. Table I-A summarizes the sample ID, the in-vitro SPF data and the UVA1 wavelength at which 0.5 absorbance units occurred. The former measurement provides a relative difference of the magnitude of UVR absorption. The latter measurement becomes important when evaluating the breadth of UVR absorption. The data clearly showed that not only does Kraton enhance the absorption activity of ZnO, but individually, Solastay (SS) does as well. Surprisingly, and more importantly, the presence of the combination of Kraton and Solastay together with ZnO showed a significant increase in both in-vitro SPF magnitude and UVA1 breadth of absorption, much greater than what would be expected based on the corresponding values for each component individually.
In using the data in Table I-A above, the unexpected synergy is evaluated from two different perspectives. Through the various dispersion combinations described in Table 1-B below, the theoretical expected in-vitro SPF values were 287 for Scenario 1, and 272 units for Scenario 2. These values were significantly lower than the observed in-vitro SPF value of 372 units for the presence of the combination of Kraton and Solastay with ZnO in a carrier oil dispersion.
Study 2
A second study was performed to characterize the interaction of ZnO and ZnO-GEM complexes with Kraton and Solastay in carrier oil dispersions. The GEM stands for Gelling Electrostatic Matrix, whereby an alkyl silicone ethoxylated polymer such as Siltech J208-812 attaches itself via electrostatic interaction to the ZnO crystal lattice structure, thereby forming a lowest free energy complex. The complex is designated as ZnO-812. The dose of 0.55 mg/cm2 on PMMA substrate was selected for this and future studies so that the data range would fall below the maximum absorbance range limit of the instrument. The isopropyl myristate (IPM) and Cosmosurf CE100 (CE) neat materials listed in Table II-A had no UVR absorption activity on their own, and are thus used as q.s. diluents to maintain the remaining ingredient ratios. Key observations were as follows:
The enhanced UVR absorption responses of ZnO-812 versus the plain ZnO are clearly shown in
Table II-B summarizes three different scenarios that establish the synergy of ZnO with Kraton/Solastay in a carrier oil dispersion. The observed in-vitro SPF value of 105 is significantly higher than the theoretical in-vitro SPF values of 24, 29, and 48.
Table II-C summarizes two different scenarios that establish the synergy of ZnO-812 with Kraton/Solastay in a carrier oil dispersion. The observed in-vitro SPF value of 129 is significantly higher than the theoretical in-vitro SPF values of 27 and 60.
Table II-D summarizes two different scenarios that establish the synergy of ZnO-812 with Kraton/Solastay in a CE100 carrier oil dispersion. The observed in-vitro SPF value of 156 is significantly higher than the theoretical in-vitro SPF values of 47 and 65.
Table II-E shows another unexpected synergy with Solastay in combination with CE100 versus the Solastay dispersed in IPM. Both CE100 and IPM are transparent to UVA, and therefore it is remarkable that the Solastay in-vitro SPF magnitude would increase by 11 units, almost double, upon dispersion in CE100 versus IPM.
Study 3
The purpose of this study was to further characterize the interaction of CE100 with ZnO and the ZnO-GEMs prepared with J208-612 and J208-812. J208-612 is slightly more water soluble, with 6 sites containing C12 groups, and 4 sites containing eight moles of ethoxylation. J208-812 is completely hydrophobic with 8 sites containing C12 groups, and 2 sites containing eight moles of ethoxylation. Kraton is not directly compatible with CE100, and therefore not included in this study. The carrier oil, octisalate, is also absent. The data in Table III-A below clearly shows the increasing UVR absorption capability of the ZnO-GEMs versus plain ZnO. Also, the influence of Solastay to adjuvate UVR absorption capability of the ZnO-GEM's is noted.
Table III-B establishes the synergy of the ZnO-GEMs with Solastay in CE100 dispersion. The observed in-vitro SPF value of 57 was significantly higher than the theoretical in-vitro SPF value of 30 for ZnO-612.The observed in-vitro SPF value of 70 was significantly higher than the theoretical in-vitro SPF value of 37 for ZnO-812.
Study 4
The purpose of this study was to explore the interrelationship between CE100, Kraton and Solastay, since it had been observed that sometimes dispersions were uniform and other times a non-uniform dispersion with agglomerate would occur. The first set of data in Table IV shows increasing in-vitro SPF magnitude as Solastay concentration increased, which was expected. Since CE100 had no UV absorption capability, the in-vitro SPF contribution was provided by the Solastay material. In previous experiments, the CE100/OS-K/SS ratio was 3.5:1.0:0.5. In those experiments, it appeared that the Kraton gellant migrated from octisalate to the preferred, relatively more hydrocarbon alkyl chains on the CE100, and thus, non-uniform agglomerate formed. To change dispersion dynamics and achieve a uniform dispersion, the OS-K content in the ratio was increased. Uniform dispersions were obtained and satisfactorily spread on the PMMA substrate. The second data set in Table IV shows the impact of the UV absorbing compound, octisalate, had on increasing the in-vitro SPF magnitude of the CE100/SS dispersion. The unexpected results for the absorption responses shown in the third data set came from the synergistic impact Kraton had with Solastay. The control sample of Kraton added to CE100/OS had no impact on increasing in-vitro SPF, as indicated by the same value of 10 units. However, a comparison of CE100/OS/SS dispersions to the corresponding CE100/OS-K/SS dispersions showed synergistic absorption responses at each ratio, as shown in
Study 5
It is known that solvent polarity affects the UV absorption spectrum of sunscreen active materials, in that generally increasing polarity enhances sunscreen performance.
It is also known that there is an upper limit and the effect is system dependent. Therefore, knowledge of solvent polarity based on dielectric constant, Table V, helps to understand simple systems such as the dispersions listed below.
The purpose of Study 5 was to investigate the UV absorption responses of two ZnO-GEMs versus plain ZnO as a function of solvent polarity. The data in Table VI-a showed the following trends in the absorption response for in-vitro SPF:
Table VI-B summarizes the UVA1 absorption response data by determining the wavelength at 0.5 absorbance units in the 340-400 nm region. Although the wavelengths @ 0.5 abs were similar between the plain ZnO and the ZnO-GEMs, it is in
Study 6
This study was a continuation of Study 5 whereby the effects of the addition of Kraton to the plain ZnO and the ZnO-Gem dispersions were investigated. The carrier oils were gelled with 5% Kraton, which was transparent to UVR. The in-vitro SPF data summarized in Table VII-A were the same as those noted above. However, the magnitudes of absorption for the Kraton containing dispersions were unexpectedly higher and clearly illustrated in
The data in Table VII-B shows essentially the same behavior for UVA1 as noted in the previous study in that the wavelength at 0.5 absorbance units occurred nearly at the same point. It is in
Study 7
This study was also a continuation of Study 5 and focused on the addition of Solastay to the ZnO and ZnO-GEM carrier oil dispersions. It was important to note the baseline in-vitro SPF contribution of Solastay in the carrier oils as presented in Table VIII-A, and also note that the presence of the GEM materials J208-612 and 812 had no effect on in-vitro SPF. Interestingly, the non-aromatic as well as the aromatic carrier oils were showing significant, higher increases in in-vitro SPF versus those presented in Tables VI-A and VII-A.
The UVA1 data summarized in Table VIII-B shows higher values for wavelengths at 0.5 absorbance units. However, the trend was the same as noted previously in that the UVA1 wavelength numbers @ 0.5 abs were similar between the plain ZnO and the ZnO-GEMs. As shown in
Study 8
This Study was a continuation of Study 7 whereby the effects of the addition of Kraton to the ZnO and ZnO-GEM Solastay/carrier oil dispersions were investigated. The in-vitro SPF data in Table IX-A showed increasing magnitudes across the non-aromatic and aromatic carrier oils.
The synergies between the Kraton/Solastay combination with the ZnO and ZnO-GEMs in carrier oil dispersions are shown in
The UVA1 data summarized in Table IX-B shows higher values for wavelengths at 0.5 absorbance compared to those in Table VIII-B. However, the trend was the same as noted previously in that the wavelength numbers @ 0.5 abs were similar between the plain ZnO and the ZnO-GEMs. It was in
Study 9
Samples prepared for Study 9, 10, and 11 contain carrier oils at 20% of the concentration used in Study 5, 6, 7, and 8. Therefore, the in-vitro SPF absorption response data for Study 9, 10 and 11 are approximately 20-30% of the values observed for the latter studies. The remaining amount of carrier oil was replaced with the transparent UV absorbing material, Cosmosurf CE100, to investigate its effects on the UVR absorption responses of plain ZnO and ZnO-GEMs. The dilution effect was necessary to be able to spread enough dispersion over the PMMA substrate and have measureable values that would fall below the maximum absorbance range limit of the instrument.
The data in Table X-A shows an unexpected increase in in-vitro SPF values across the aromatic and non-aromatic polar diluents, and from plain ZnO to ZnO-GEMs. Surprisingly, the in-vitro SPF data in Table X-A multiplied by a factor of 3 or 4 (OS content is ¼ amount previously used), yielded significantly larger values than those listed in Table V-A. As a conservative theoretical example, the CE100/OS/ZnO-812 (ratio of 3:1:1) SPF value of 93×3=279 SPF units is significantly higher compared to the in-vitro SPF 94 of OS/ZnO-812 (ratio 4:1) dispersion.
Small increases in UVA1 wavelength at 0.5 absorbance units were also noted between the ZnO and ZnO-GEM materials, as shown in Table X-B. However,
Study 10
As a follow-up to Study 9, Solastay was introduced to the ZnO and ZnO-GEM CE100/carrier oil dispersions. The results were quite surprising because the in-vitro SPF values for the ZnO and ZnO-GEM CE100/Solvent/SS dispersions were higher than those for the analogous Solvent/SS dispersions. For example, CE100/Octisalate/Solastay/ZnO-812 (ratio 2.5/1.0/0.5/1.0) in-vitro SPF was 193 units, whereas the in-vitro SPF for Octisalate/Solastay/ZnO-812 (ratio 3.5/0.5/1.0) was 167 units. The difference between 193 in-vitro SPF units versus 167 in-vitro SPF units was very surprising because the former contained only about 30% of the amount of octisalate versus the latter.
The UVA1 data presented in Table XI-B shows an overall increase in breadth of absorption, especially noted for the ZnO-812 complex.
Study 11
In Study 11, the effects of Kraton on UVR absorption in ZnO and ZnO-GEM dispersions containing CE100 with Solastay and carrier oil were investigated. Kraton remained uniformly dispersed in the aromatic carrier oil dispersions that contained Solastay as well as CE100. If Solastay was absent the Kraton polymer agglomerated in a non-uniform manner. The observed in-vitro SPF values were significantly higher than those values in the previous study. The combination of Kraton and Solastay synergistically enhanced the UVR absorption responses of ZnO and ZnO-GEMs in CE100/carrier oil dispersions containing BHB and octisalate.
Study 12
A series of oil-in-water sunscreen emulsions were prepared to examine the synergistic SPF boosting effect of Kraton 1650G, Solastay and Cosmosurf CE-100 on various physical sunscreens—uncoated ZnO, and ZnO-GEM complexes. It should be noted that organic sunscreens were also included in the formulas. The in-vitro and in-vivo data are summarized separately in Table XIII below. The addition of CE-100 further boosts the efficiency of ZnO and ZO-812 to absorb UV radiation.
First, it should be noted that the trends noted in the in-vitro SPF data of Table XIII match the trends noted in the oil phases summarized in Tables I-A through XII-A.
Surprisingly, for a low (3%) concentration level of physical sunscreen, there was an increase of 16 in-vivo SPF units for ZnO-812 with no adjuvants compared to the formula with the synergistic system (Kraton, Solastay, CE-100) of adjuvants. Interestingly, in the analogous ZnO series, there was an increase of 9 in-vivo SPF units for ZnO with no adjuvants compared to the formula with the synergistic system (Kraton, Solastay, CE-100) of adjuvants. At higher concentrations of ZnO and ZnO-812 it is possible that more of a differential would be noted in the in-vivo SPF data.
Ingredient ranges were varied as follows:
Study 13
A series of water-in-oil sunscreen lotion emulsions were prepared to confirm that the synergistic in-vitro effects noted above would translate to an inverse emulsion. Also, ingredient ranges were varied as follows:
The in-vitro data summarized in Table IV below confirm that the combination of Kraton and Solastay synergistically enhances the UV absorption ability of ZnO and ZnO-812. The presence of Cosmosurf CE-100 further enhances that synergy as indicated in Table XIV below. This holds true despite the fact that, as previously established (e.g., in Table IIA above, sample ID #0008-85-1), CE100 has minimal if any SPF on its own.
Study 14
A series of oil-in-water sunscreen crème emulsions were prepared to confirm that the synergistic in-vitro effects noted above would translate to a different product form, in this case a cream (Table XV) and a stick (Table XVI). Ingredient ranges were varied as follows:
The in-vitro data summarized in Table XV confirm that the combination of Kraton and Solastay synergistically enhances the UV absorption ability of ZnO and ZnO-812 in cream form. The presence of Cosmosurf CE-100 further enhances that synergy as indicated.
A series of sunscreen sticks were prepared to confirm that the synergistic in-vitro effects noted above would translate to a different product form. Ingredient ranges were varied as follows:
The in-vitro data summarized in Table XVI confirm that the combination of Kraton and Solastay synergistically enhances the UV absorption ability of ZnO and ZnO-812 in a stick form. The presence of Cosmosurf CE-100 further enhances that synergy as indicated in the Table below.
Study 15
Previously, the SPF boosting effects of Kraton 1650G and Solastay on uncoated ZnO and GEM (gelling electrostatic matrix) ZnO were illustrated. In Table XVII, ZnO is complexed with Triethoxycaprylylsiloxane (TECS). The data indicate that the combination of Kraton 1650G and Solastay boosted the UV absorption ability of the ZnO-TECS, and that the addition of CE-100 further boosted that capability as shown below.
Study 16
In another study, the SPF boosting effects of Kraton 1650G and Solastay on two complexed titanium dioxides was examined. The data indicated that the combination of Kraton 1650G and Solastay boosted the UV absorption ability of the TiO2-M262 and TiO2-JTTO, and that the addition of CE-100 further boosted that capability as shown below.
Finally, in the data of Tables II-XVIII, Kraton G1650 was used. However, as previously discussed, other Kraton® polymers are suitable, such as Kraton D1164PT (styrene/isoprene copolymer) and Kraton G1702HU (hydrogenated styrene/isoprene copolymer). In testing data similar to that provided above, these two additional Kratons were evaluated based on their effectiveness in boosting SPF of ZnO and ZnO-812. Kraton 1650G was found to be the most effective, but the other Kraton polymers may be preferred in other compositions or for other reasons. It is also expected that the trends noted for the octisalate solvent/Kraton variants would be the same for the less polar solvents of Hallbrite BHB, Finsolv EB, and isopropyl myristate.
While the present disclosure has been described with reference to one or more exemplary embodiments, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes may be made and equivalents may be substituted for elements thereof without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. In addition, many modifications may be made to adapt a particular situation or material to the teachings of the disclosure without departing from the scope thereof. Therefore, it is intended that the present disclosure not be limited to the particular embodiment(s) disclosed as the best mode contemplated.
The present application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/477,944, filed on Apr. 21, 2011.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5587148 | Mitchell et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5618522 | Kaleta | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5776440 | Forestier | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5939053 | Forestier | Aug 1999 | A |
| 6060041 | Candau | May 2000 | A |
| 6165450 | Chaudhuri et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6235271 | Luther | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6294158 | Dupuis | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6361782 | Chevalier et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6440402 | Gonzalez | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6444647 | Robinson | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6492326 | Robinson | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6500411 | SenGupta | Dec 2002 | B2 |
| 6716418 | SenGupta | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6881776 | Butuc | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 7098189 | Malik | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7108860 | Dueva et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7276230 | Gonzalez | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 20040009130 | Detore et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20050004274 | Healy et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050013781 | Dueva-Koganov | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20070006802 | Nause | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070135535 | Hwang et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070196295 | Cantwell et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20080107615 | Keene et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080112904 | Traynor et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20090035234 | Cunningham et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090057627 | Bonda et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090186055 | Dumousseaux et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20100021403 | Bonda et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100119465 | Spaulding et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| Entry |
|---|
| Cosmosurf CE Series, Datasheet [online], Surfa Tech Corporation, 2009 [Retrieved on Oct. 31, 2012]. Retrieved from the Internet; <URL: http://www.surfatech.com/pdfs/COSMOSURF—CE—SERIES.pdf (SurfaTech; p. 2, Standard Products, Applications. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Mar. 29, 2012 from corresponding International Patent Application No. PCT/US2010/049106, 7 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion Dated Aug. 11, 2009 From PCT/US2009/03526. |
| Definition of Photoconductivity From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoconductivity). |
| Definition of Semiconductor From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor). |
| Definition of Bandgap From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandgap). |
| List of Semiconductor Materials From Wikipedia (http://en/wikipedia.org/wiki/List—of—semiconductor—materials). |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion Dated Nov. 1, 2010 From PCT/US2010/49106. |
| Office Action Dated Sep. 9, 2011 From U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,943. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentibility Dated Feb. 18, 2011 From PCT/US2009/03526. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentibility Dated Mar. 20, 2012 From PCT/US2010/049106. |
| Cosmosurf CE Series, Datasheet [Online]. Surfa Tech Corporation, 2009 [Retrieved on Oct. 31, 2012]. Retrieved From the Internet: <URL: http://www.surfatech.com/pdfs/COSMOSURF—CE—SERIES.pdf (Surfatech; p. 2, Standard Products, Applications. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion Dated Dec. 6, 2012 From Corresponding International Application No. PCT/US12/34522. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20120269744 A1 | Oct 2012 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61477944 | Apr 2011 | US |
