Naturally occurring ultraviolet radiation (UVR) from the sun has been divided into two broad band regions: low-energy UVA (with wavelengths of 320 to 400 nm) and high-energy UVB (280–320 nm). Relative effectiveness of different wavelengths in producing a biologic reaction is called action spectrum for this particular reaction. The most obvious acute reaction of white skin to UVR is erythema which is commonly addressed to as “sunburn”. The action spectrum of solar erythema lies mainly in the UVB band region, with a peak at 295 nm and rapid decline towards the UVA region (Fig. 1): 295 nm UVB radiation (UVBR) is about 1000 times more erythemogenic than short-wave UVAR. Under normal conditions, middle and long-wave UVAR do not induce sunburn. UVAR has therefore been further broken down into two bands UVA1 (340–400 nm) and UVA2 (320–340 nm) because of the increased erythemogenic activity of UVA2 compared to UVA1.


Solid Lipid Nanoparticles Actinic Keratose Skin Aging Minimal Erythema Dose Basal Cell Carcinoma 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kullavanijaya P, Lim HW. Photoprotection. J Am Acad Dermatol 2005; 52:937–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schaefer H, Moyal D, Fourtanicr A. Recent advances in sun protection. Semin Cut Med Surg 1998; 17:266–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jeanmougin M. Photodermatoses et photoprotection. Paris: Deltacom, 1983.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Young AR. Chromophores in human skin. Phys Med Biol 1997; 42:789–802.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goukassian DA, Eller MS, Yaar M et al. Thymidine dinucleotide mimics the effect of solar-simulated irradiation on p53 and p53-regulated proteins. J Invest Dermatol 1999; 112:25–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wolpowitz D, Gilchrest BA. The vitamin D questions: How much do you need and how should you get it? J Am Acad Dermatol 2006; 54:301–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pinnell SR. Cutaneous photodamage, oxidative stress and topical antioxidant protection. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 48:1–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wenczl E, Pool S, Timmerman AJ et al. Physiological doses of ultraviolet irradiation induce DNA strand breaks in cultured human melanocytes, as detected by means of an immunochemical assay. Photochem Photobiol 1997; 66:826–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Parsons PG, Hayward IP. Inhibition of DNA repair synthesis by sunlight. Photochem Photobiol 1985; 42:287–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marrot L, Belaidi JP, Meunier JR et al. The human melanocyte as a particular target for UVA radiation and an endpoint for photoprotection assessment. Photochem Photobiol 1999; 69:686–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mouret S, Baudouin C, Charveron M et al. Cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers are predominant DNA lesions in whole skin exposed to UVA radiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006; 103:13765–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hönigsmann H. Erythema and pigmentation. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2002; 18:75–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eller MS, Yaar M, Gilchrest BA. DNA damage and melanogenesis. Nature 1994; 372:413–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gilchrest BA, Park HY, Eller MS et al. Mechanismes of ultraviolet-induced pigmentation. Photochem Photobiol 1996; 63:1–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gange RW, Blackett AD, Matzinger EA et al. Comparative protection efficiency of UVA and UVB-induced tans against erythema and formation of endonuclease-sensitive sites in DNA by UVB in human skin. J Invest Dermatol 1985; 85:362–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Varani J, Spearman D, Perone P et al. Inhibition of type I procollagen synthesis by damaged collagen in photoaged skin and by collagenase-degraded collagen in vitro. Am J Pathol 2001; 158:931–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kawaguchi Y, Tanaka H, Okada T et al. Effect of reactive oxygen species on the elastin mRNA expression in cultured human dermal fibroblasts. Free Radic Biol Med 1997; 23:192–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kelly DA, Young AR, McGregor JM et al. Sensitivity to sunburn is associated with susceptibility to UVR-induced suppression of cutaneous cell-mediated immunity. J Exp Med 2000; 191:561–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bestak R, Halliday GM. Chronic low-dose UVA irradiation induces local suppression of contact hypersensitivity, Langerhans cell depletion and suppressor cell avtivation in C3H/HeJ mice. Photochem Photobiol 1996; 64:969–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nghiem DX, Kazimi N, Clydesdale G et al. Ultraviolet A radiation suppresses an established immune response: implications for sunscreen design. J Invest Dermatol 2001; 117:1193–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    DeBuys HV, Levy SB, Murray JC et al. Modern approaches to photoprotection. Dermatol Clin 2000; 18:577–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lacour JP. Carcinogenesis of basal cell carcinomas: genetics and molecular mechanisms. Br J Dermatol 2002; 146Suppl 61:17–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ting WW, Vest CD, Sontheimer R. Practical and experimental consideration of sun protection in dermatology. Int J Dermatol 2003; 42:505–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kelly DA, Seed PT, Young AR et al. A commercial sunscreen’s protection against ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression is more than 50% lower than protection against sunburn in humans. J Invest Dermatol 2003; 120:65–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Diffey BL, Tanner PR, Matts PJ et al. In vitro assessment of the broad-spectrum ultraviolet protection of sunscreen products. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 43:1024–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ciba Specialty Chemicals. Ciba Tinosorb® product brochure. Basel, 2002.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Szczurko C, Dompmartin A, Michel M et al. Photocontact allergy to oxybenzone: ten years of experience. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 1994; 10:144–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Journé F, Marguery MC, Rakotondrazafy J et al. Sunscreen sensitization: a 5-year-study. Acta Derm Venereol 1999; 79:211–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bouillon C. Recent advances in sun protection. J Dermatol Sci 2000; 23Suppl 1:S57–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sarveiya V, Risk S, Benson HAE. Liquid chromatographic assay for common sunscreen agents: application to in vivo assessment of skin penetration and systemic absorption in human volunteers. J Chromatogr B 2004; 803:225–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Janjua NR, Mogcnscn B, Andersson AM et al. Systemic absorption of the sunscreens benzophenone-3, octyl-methoxycinnamate and 3-(4-methyl-benzylidene) camphor after whole-body topical application and reproductive hormone levels in humans. J Invest Dermatol 2004; 123:57–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schlumpf M, Cotton B, Conscience M et al. In vitro and in vivo estrogenicity of UV screens. Environ Health Perspect 2001; 109:239–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brand RM, Pike J, Wilson RM et al. Sunscreens containing physical UV blockers can increase transdermal absorption of pesticides. Toxicol Ind Health 2003; 19:9–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pont AR, Charron AR, Brand RM. Active ingredients in sunscreens act as topical penetration enhancers for the herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2004; 195:348–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sutherland JC, Griffin KP. P-aminobenzoic acid can sensitize the formation of pyrimidine dimers in DNA: direct chemical evidence. Photochem Photobiol 1984; 40:391–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gasparro FP, Mitchnick M, Nash JF. A review of sunscreen safety and efficacy. Photochem Photobiol 1998; 68:243–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chatelain E, Gabard B. Photostabilization of butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane (avobenzone) and ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate by bis-ethylhexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine (Tinosorb S), a new UV broadband filter. Photochem Photobiol 2001; 74:401–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ashby J, Tinwell H, Plautz J et al. Lack of binding to isolated estrogen or androgen receptors and inactivity in the immature rat uterotrophic assay, of the ultraviolet sunscreen filters Tinosorb M-active and Tinosorb S. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2001; 34:287–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Moseley H, Cameron H, MacLeod T et al. New sunscreens confer improved protection for photosensitive patients in the blue light region. Br J Dermatol 2001; 145:789–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mitchnick MA, Fairhurst D, Pinnell SR. Microfine zinc oxide (Z-cote) as a photostable UVA/UVB sunblock agent. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999; 40:85–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nakagawa Y, Wakuri S, Sakamoto K et al. The photogenotoxicity of titanium dioxide particles. Mutat Res 1997; 394:125–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Müller RH, Mäder K, Gohla S. Solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN) for controlled drug delivery—a review of the state of the art. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2000; 50:161–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Villalobos-Hernández JR, Müller-Goymann CC. Sun protection enhancement of titanium dioxide crystals by the use of carnauba wax nanoparticles: The synergistic interaction between organic and inorganic sunscreens at nanoscale. Int J Pharm 2006; 322:161–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wulf HC, Stender IM, Lock-Andersen J. Sunscreens used at the beach do not protect against erythema: A new definition of SPF is proposed. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 1997; 13:129–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Faurschou A, Wulf HC. The relation between sun protection factor and amount of sunscreen applied in vivo. Br J Dermatol 2007; 156:716–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Diffey BL, Grice J. The influence of sunscreen type on photoprotection. Br J Dermatol 1997; 137:103–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Phillips TJ, Bhawan J, Yaar M et al. Effect of daily versus intermittent sunscreen application on solar simulated UV-radiation-induced skin response in humans. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 43:618–8.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Béani JC. Photoprotection externe. In: Société Franchise de Photodermatologie, ed. Photodermatologie. Rueil-Malmaison: Arnette, 2003:131–46.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Stege H, Budde MA, Grether-Beck S et al. Evaluation of the capacity of sunscreens to photoprotect lupus erythematosus patients by employing the photoprovocation test. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2000; 16:256–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kligman LH, Sayre RM. An action spectrum for ultraviolet induced elastosis in hairless mice: quantification of elastosis by image analysis. Photochem Photobiol 1991; 53:237–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Fourtanier A, Bernerd F, Bouillon C et al. Protection of skin biological targets by different types of sunscreens. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2006; 22:22–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kligman LH, Agin PP, Sayre RM. Broad-spectrum sunscreens with UVAI and UVAII absorbers provide increased protection against solar simulation radiation-induced damage in hairless mice. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1996; 47:129–55.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tsukahara K, Moriwaki S, Hotta M et al. The effect of sunscreen on skin elastase activity induced by ultraviolet-A irradiation. Biol Pharm Bull 2005; 28:2302–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Seité S, Moyal D, Richard S et al. Mexoryl SX: a broad absorption UVA filter protects human skin from the effects of repeated suberythemal doses of UVA. J Photochem Photobiol B 1998; 44:69–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Serre I, Cano JP, Picot MC et al. Immunosuppression induced by acute solar-simulated ultraviolet exposure in humans: prevention by a sunscreen with a sun protection factor of 15 and high UVA protection. J Am Acad Dermatol 1997; 37:187–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Thompson SC, Jolley D, Marks R. Reduction of solar keratoses by regular sunscreen use. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1147–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Darlington S, Williams G, Neale R et al. A randomized controlled trial to assess sunscreen application and beta carotene supplementation in the prevention of solar keratoses. Arch Dermatol 2003; 139:451–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wulf HC, Poulscn T, Brodthagcn H et al. Sunscreens for delay of ultraviolet induction of skin tumors. J Am Acad Dematol 1982; 7:194–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ananthaswamy HN, Loughlin SM, Cox P et al. Sunlight and skin cancer: inhibition of p53 mutations in UV-irradiated mouse skin by sunscreens. Nat Med 1997; 3:510–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Krekels G, Voorter C, Kuik F et al. DNA-protection by sunscreens: p53-immunostaining. Eur J Dermatol 1997; 7:259–62.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Berne B, Ponten J, Ponten F. Decreased p53 expression in chronically sun-exposed human skin after topical photoprotection. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 1998; 14:148–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ley RD, Fourtanier A. Sunscreen protection against ultraviolet radiation-induced pyrimidine dimers in mouse epidermal DNA. Photochem Photobiol 1997; 65:1007–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Fourtanier A. Mexoryl SX protects against solar-simulated UVR-induced photocarcinogenesis in mice. Photochem Photobiol 1996; 64:688–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Green A, Williams G, Neale R et al. Daily sunscreen application and betacarotene supplementation in prevention of basal-cell and squamous-cell carcinomas of the skin: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 1999; 354:723–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gallagher RP, Hill GB, Bajdik CD et al. Sunlight exposure, pigmentary factors and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer. I. Basal cell carcinoma. Arch Dermatol 1995; 131:157–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Westerdahl J, Olsson H, Masback A et al. Is the use of sunscreens a risk factor for malignant melanoma? Melanoma Res 1995; 5:59–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Whiteman DC, Valery P, McWhirter W et al. Risk factors for childhood melanoma in Queensland, Australia. Int J Cancer 1997; 70:26–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wolf P, Quehenberger F, Mulegger R et al. Phenotypic markers, sunlight-related factors and sunscreen use in patients with cutaneous melanoma: an Austrian cas-control study. Melanoma Res 1998; 8:370–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Westerdahl J, Ingvar C, Masback A et al. Sunscreen use and malignant melanoma. Int J Cancer 2000; 87:145–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Diffey BL. Sunscreens and melanoma: The future looks bright. Br J Dermatol 2005; 153:378–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Huncharek M, Kupelnick B. Use of topical sunscreens and the risk of malignant melanoma: a metaanalysis of 9067 patients from 11 case-control studies. Am J Public Health 2002; 92:1173–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Dennis LK, Beane Freeman LE, Van Beek MJ. Sunscreen use and the risk of melanoma: a quantitative review. Ann Intern Med 2003; 139:966–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Elwood JM, Jopson J. Melanoma and sun exposure: an overview of published studies. Int J Cancer 1997; 73:198–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Walter SD, King WD, Marrett LD. Association of cutaneous malignant melanoma with intermittent exposure to ultraviolet radiation: results of a case-control study in Ontario, Canada. Int J Epidemiol 1999; 28:418–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Stern RS; PUVA Follow up study. The risk of melanoma in association with long-term exposure to PUVA. J Am Acad Dermatol 2001; 44:755–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Gallagher RP, Rivers JK, Lee TK et al. Broad-spectrum sunscreen use and the development of new nevi in white children: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 283:2955–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Autier P, Dore JF, Negrier S et al. Sunscreen use and duration of sun exposure: a double-blind, randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91:1304–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Matsuoka LY, Wortman J, Hanifan N et al. Chronic sunscreen use decreases circulating concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D: a preliminary study. Arch Dermatol 1988; 124:1802–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    MacLaughlin JA, Anderson RR, Holick MF. Spectral character of sunlight modulates photosynthesis of previtamin D3 and its photoisomers in human skin. Science 1982; 216:1001–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Marks R, Foley PA, Jolley D et al. The effects of regular sunscreen use on vitamin D levels in an Australian population: results of a randomized controlled trial. Arch Dermatol 1995; 131:415–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Farrerons J, Barnadas M, Rodriguez J et al. Clinically prescribed sunscreen (sun protection factor 15) does not decrease serum vitamin D concentration sufficiently either to induce changes in parathyroid function or in metabolic markers. Br J Dermatol 1998; 139:422–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Sollitto RB, Kraemer KH, DiGiovanna JJ. Normal vitamin D levels can be maintained despite rigorous photoprotection: six years’ experience with xeroderma pigmentosum. J Am Acad Dermatol 1997; 37:942–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Yarosh D, Klein J, O’Connor A et al. Effect of topically applied T4 endonuclease V in liposomes on skin cancer in xeroderma pigmentosum: a randomized study. Xeroderma Pigmentosum Study Group. Lancet 2001; 357:926–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Stahl W, Krutmann J. Systemische Photoprotektion durch Karotinoide. Hautarzt 2006; 57:281–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Leroy D. Les crémes solaires. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1999; 126:357–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    McCarthy WH. The Australian experience in sun protection and screening for melanoma. J Surg Oncol 2004; 86:236–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Landes Bioscience and Springer Science+Business Media 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guido Bens
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Dermatology Hôtel-DieuClermont-Ferrand University HospitalClermont-Ferrand cedex 1France

Personalised recommendations