Gustavo Facchini, Samara Eberlin, Stefano Piatto Clerici, Ana Lucia Alves Tabarini Pinheiro, Adilson Costa.
Unwanted side effects such as dryness, hypersensitivity, and cutaneous photosensitivity are challenge for adherence and therapeutical success for patients using treatments for inflammatory and allergic skin response. In this study, we compared the effects of two dermatological formulations, which are used in inflammatory and/or allergic skin conditions: dexchlorpheniramine maleate (DCP; 10 mg/g) and promethazine (PTZ; 20 mg/g).
Methods: We evaluated both formulations for phototoxicity potential, skin irritation, anti-inflammatory and antihistaminic abilities, and skin barrier repair in vitro and ex vivo using the standard OECD test guideline n° 432, the ECVAM protocol n° 78, and cultured skin explants from a healthy patient. Ultraviolet A was chosen as exogenous agent to induce allergic and inflammatory response. Both PTZ and DCP promoted increases in interleukin-1 (IL-1) synthesis in response to ultraviolet A (UVA) radiation compared to control. However, the increase observed with PTZ was significantly greater than the DCP, indicating that the latter has a lower irritant potential. DCP also demonstrated a protective effect on UVA-induced leukotriene B4 and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-jB) synthesis. Conversely, PTZ demonstrates more robust UVA antihistaminic activity. Likewise, PTZ promoted a significantly greater increase in the production of involucrin and keratin 14, both associated with protective skin barrier property.
Conclusion: In conclusion, these data suggest possible diverging UVA response mechanisms of DCP and PTZ, which gives greater insight into the contrasting photosensitizing potential between DCP and PTZ observed in the patients.