Immune Protection Factors Research Articles

The suppression of immunity by ultraviolet radiation: UVA, nitric oxide and DNA damage.

We have examined the mechanism by which solar-simulated ultraviolet radiation (ssUV) suppresses memory immunity to nickel in allergic humans. In initial studies, we used inbred mice to determine the contribution of different wavebands to sunlight-induced immunosuppression. We found that low dose UVA can enhance memory, medium dose UVA (half the amount in one minimum erythemal dose of ssUV) is immunosuppressive, but higher doses protect from UVB. This is genetically dependent, as it is not observed in all mouse strains. UVA caused a similar dose-related change in recall immunity in humans. ssUV dose responses determined the limits of protection provided by sunscreens from immunosuppression in humans. Immune protection factors calculated from these data correlated with UVA protection, but not with sun protection factor, showing that in commercial sunscreens that provide good UVB protection, UVA protection limits prevention of immunosuppression. N(G)-monomethyl-l-arginine acetate (l-NMMA) was used to inhibit nitric oxide (NO) production and T4N5 liposomes containing T4 endonuclease V to enhance DNA repair. Sub-erythemal ssUV caused a dose-related local suppression of recall immunity to nickel in humans. l-NMMA and the liposomes protected the nickel reaction, suggesting that NO and DNA damage are mediators of UV-induced immunosuppression in humans.

Determination of sunscreen immune protection factors using human dendritic cell suspensions

In a previous study, we have used UVB-irradiated human skin explants and the allostimulatory function of Langerhans cells (LC) to determine immune protection factors (IPF) for sunscreens. We sought here to simplify the model by using either human enriched LC suspensions or in vitro generated dendritic cells from human monocytes (MoDC). LC or MoDC suspensions were irradiated with increasing doses of UVB through a piece of translucent strip recovered or not with the sunscreens. The allostimulatory function of the cells was then analysed in a mixed lymphocyte reaction and the UVB dose providing 50% immunosuppression (D50%) was determined graphically. IPF were determined by the ratio of the D50% value in the presence of sunscreen to that of the vehicle alone. In either experimental conditions, the D50% in the presence of sunscreens was significantly higher ( p<0.01) than that obtained with the vehicle, demonstrating the sunscreen immunoprotective effect. IPF values obtained with either DC suspensions were very similar and quite comparable to those previously obtained in the skin explant model. Thus, the present in vitro model provides easy tools to determine a new important biological parameter for sunscreens, i.e. immune protection.

Immune Protection Factors of Chemical Sunscreens Measured in the Local Contact Hypersensitivity Model in Humans

We conducted a randomized trial designed to calculate human in vivo immune protection factors of two sunscreen preparations in a model of ultraviolet-induced local suppression of the induction of contact hypersensitivity to 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene. Seventy-five male subjects were exposed in a multistage study to multiples of their individual minimal erythema dose of solar-simulated ultraviolet radiation with or without protection by an ultraviolet B sunscreen (sun protection factor 5.2) or a broad-spectrum ultraviolet A + B sunscreen (sun protection factor 6.2). After 24 h subjects were sensitized with 50 microL of 0.0625% 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene on a nonirradiated or ultraviolet-irradiated field on the buttock that was unprotected or protected by sunscreen. Three weeks after sensitization the subjects were challenged with varying concentrations of 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene on their upper inner arm, and the contact hypersensitivity response was determined at 48 and 72 h based on a semiquantitative clinical score, contact hypersensitivity lesion diameters, and dermal skin edema measurement by 20 MHz ultrasound. The 50% immunosuppressive dose ranged from 0.63 to 0.79 minimal erythema dose, depending on the endpoint parameter. Both sunscreens offered significant immunoprotection (p = 0.014-0.002) and their immune protection factor ranged from 4.5 to 5.8 (ultraviolet B sunscreen) and from 7.7 to 11 (ultraviolet A + B sunscreen). The immune protection factor of the ultraviolet B sunscreen was similar to the sun protection factor (5.2), whereas the sunscreen with broad-spectrum ultraviolet A + B protection exhibited better immunoprotective capacity than predicted from the sun protection factor.

Are Broad-Spectrum Sunscreens Necessary for Immunoprotection?

Are Broad-Spectrum Sunscreens Necessary for Immunoprotection?

High Ultraviolet A Protection Affords Greater Immune Protection Confirming that Ultraviolet A Contributes to Photoimmunosuppression in Humans

Solar radiation causes immunosuppression that contributes to skin cancer growth. Photoprotective strategies initially focused on the more erythemogenic ultraviolet B. More recently, the relationship of ultraviolet A and skin cancer has received increased attention. We hypothesized that if ultraviolet A contributes significantly to human ultraviolet-induced immune suppression, then increased ultraviolet A filtration by a sunscreen would better protect the immune system during ultraviolet exposure. Two hundred and eleven volunteers were randomized into study groups and received solar-simulated radiation, ranging from 0 to 2 minimum erythema dose, on gluteal skin, with or without sunscreen, 48 h prior to sensitization with dinitrochlorobenzene. Contact hypersensitivity response was evaluated by measuring the increase in skin fold thickness of five graded dinitrochlorobenzene challenge sites on the arm, 2 wk after sensitization. Clinical scoring using the North American Contact Dermatitis Group method was also performed. Solar-simulated radiation dose-response curves were generated and immune protection factor was calculated using a nonlinear regression model. Significance of immune protection between study groups was determined with the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon exact test. The sunscreen with high ultraviolet A absorption (ultraviolet A protection factor of 10, based on the in vivo persistent pigment darkening method) and a labeled sun protection factor of 15 demonstrated better immune protection than the product that had a low ultraviolet A absorption (ultraviolet A protection factor of 2) and a labeled sun protection factor of 15. Nonlinear regression analysis based on skin fold thickness increase revealed that the high ultraviolet A protection factor sunscreen had an immune protection factor of 50, more than three times its sun protection factor, whereas the low ultraviolet A protection factor sunscreen had an immune protection factor of 15, which was equal to its labeled sun protection factor. This study demonstrates that ultraviolet A contributes greatly to human immune suppression and that a broad-spectrum sunscreen with high ultraviolet A filtering capacity results in immune protection that exceeds erythema protection. These results show that high ultraviolet A protection is required to protect against ultraviolet-induced damage to cutaneous immunity.

Prevention of Immunosuppression by Sunscreens in Humans Is Unrelated to Protection from Erythema and Dependent on Protection from Ultraviolet A in the Face of Constant Ultraviolet B Protection

Sunscreens have been advocated as an important means of preventing skin cancer. Ultraviolet radiation induced immunosuppression is recognized as an important event in skin cancer development, yet the effectiveness of sunscreens in protecting the human immune system from ultraviolet radiation (i.e. ultraviolet radiation) is still unclear. The only currently accepted method of sunscreen rating is the sun protection factor system based on the prevention of erythema. We determined immune protection factors for six commercially available sunscreens using a nickel contact hypersensitivity model in humans. Both sun protection factor and immune protection factor testing was performed using the same solar simulated ultraviolet radiation source and dose-responses were used to determine endpoints both with and without sunscreens. We found that the immune protection factor did not correlate with the sun protection factor; however, immune protection factor was significantly correlated to the ultraviolet A protective capability of the sunscreens, indicating that sunscreen protection from ultraviolet A is important for the prevention of ultraviolet immunosuppression, when there is constant ultraviolet B protection. We recommend that sunscreens should be rated against their immune protective capability to provide a better indication of their ability to protect against skin cancer.

Clinical Snippets

Hair regrowth after chemotherapy or alopecia areata commonly results in white hair. In mice treated with cyclophosphamide, Sharvov et al (p. 27) showed Fas ligand mediated melanocyte apoptosis. Melanocyte migration accompanied the recovery phase, suggesting new paradigms for treating disorders with hypopigmentation. These studies also suggest a mechanism for the hyperpigmentation of the nail bed seen with antimetabolite therapy. Endemic pemphigus foliaceus in Brazil, Fogo Selvagem, is associated with IgG antibodies against desmoglein-1 in all affected individuals and, surprisingly, half of the normal subjects living in endemic regions (Warren et al, p. 104). The clinically affected individuals and those only with antibodies differed from those with the disease by having an increased anti-desmoglein1 IgG4 level. This two-stage model for disease suggests that preventing the IgG1 to IgG4 conversion might prevent clinical disease. From Star Wars to skin tumor treatment, lasers are usually destructive devices. Yu and co-workers (p. 56) emphasize the “biostimulation” of the low energy Helium–Neon (632.8nm) laser. Basic fibroblast growth factor was induced from fibroblasts and keratinocytes and media from these irradiated cells stimulated melanocyte proliferation and migration. Thirty patients with segmental vitiligo were treated with the laser and 60% of those treated had greater than 50% repigmentation. Further studies of this treatment, especially in those recalcitrant to other forms of treatment, will be of interest. In Doctor's Dilemma, one of Shaw's characters spouts, “Stimulate the phagocytes”; some day we may shout “stimulate the melanocytes”. Prudent sunbathers – possibly an oxymoron – can avoid acute sunburn but have immunosuppression. Kelly and colleagues (p. 65) studied unexposed buttock skin of 119 white-skinned volunteers from 18–35 years for both sun-protective factor responses and the ability to be immunized with dinitrochlorobenzene. Sun Protection Factors (SPF) and Immune Protective Factors (IPF) were calculated. Although the acute sunburn response from simulated sunlight could be suppressed with commercial sunscreen, there was still immunosuppression – possibly due to unfiltered UVA. This study has important implications for the health of the public and those concerned with optimum sunscreen composition and usage and understanding the epidemiology of skin malignancies. Beta-endorphin, a peptide, is the endogenous ligand for the alpha-opiate receptor that stimulates the production of cytokeratin 16, a cytokeratin associated with wound healing and epidermal proliferation in organ culture (Bigliardi et al, p. 145). Beta-endorphins induced fibroblast and capillary proliferation in animal models. These peptides, opiates themselves and modulators of the receptors, may lead to new treatments for chronic wounds. Opiate antagonists might have roles in treating keloids or preventing hypertrophic scars. Watch Fido jump.

Protection against UV-induced suppression of contact hypersensitivity responses by sunscreens in humans.

Both in vivo skin immune responses and the skin's reaction to sun exposure integrate a complex interplay of biologic responses. The complexity and multiplicity of events that occur in the skin during an immune response make it a sensitive indication of both UVB and UVA-induced changes in the skin by sun damage, as well as those changes that are prevented by various sunscreens. Sunscreens are the most effective and widely available intervention for sun damage, other than sun avoidance or clothing. However, sunscreens vary widely in their relative ability to screen various UV waveband components, and their testing has been variably applied to outcomes other than for erythema to determine the sunburn protection factor (SPF), a measure primarily of UVB filtration only. Determination of an immune protection factor (IPF) has been proposed as an alternative or adjunctive measure to SPF, and recent studies show IPF can indeed detect added in vivo functionality of sunscreens, such as high levels of UVA protection, that SPF cannot. Clarification of the definition of IPF, however, is required. Excellent data are available on quantification of the IPF for restoring the afferent or induction arm of contact sensitivity, but other immune parameters have also been measured. Proposed here is nomenclature for whether the IPF is measured using contact sensitivity induction (IPF-CS-I), contact sensitivity elicitation (IPF-CS-E), delayed-type hypersensitivity elicitation (IPF-DTH-E), antigen-presenting cell function (IPF-APC-FXN) or numbers (IPF-APC-#), and cytokine modification such as IL-10 (i.e. IPF-cyto-IL-10). Similar nomenclatures could be used for other measures of skin function protection (i.e. DNA damage, p53 induction, oxidation products, etc.). A review of in vivo human studies, in which sunscreens are used to intervene in a UV-induced modulation of immune response, cells or cytokines, highlights the technical variables and statistical approaches which must also be standardized in the context of an IPF for regulatory or product claim purposes. Development of such IPF standards would allow the integration of both UVB and nonUVB (UVA, blue and possible IR) solar waveband effect-reversals, could be applied to integrate effects of other ingredients with protective function (i.e. antioxidants, retinoids, or other novel products), and would spur development of more advanced and complete protection products.

In this Issue

In this Issue

Effects of low-dose ultraviolet radiation on in vivo human cutaneous recall responses.

Relatively few studies have examined the effects of low-dose ultraviolet (UV) radiation on in vivo human cutaneous immunity, or the ability of sunscreens to prevent UV-induced immunosuppression. We have studied the effects of solar-simulated UV radiation on nickel contact hypersensitivity (CHS) in nickel-allergic volunteers, and on delayed type hypersensitivity responses in Mantoux-positive volunteers. Nickel CHS and Mantoux responses were significantly suppressed by acute, suberythemal UV exposures equivalent to less than 8 min summer sunlight. Both UVA and UVB wavebands were immunosuppressive, but UVA-induced immunosuppression was transient, whereas UVB had a more sustained effect. Dose-responses for UV immunosuppression were determined using the nickel method, enabling calculation of in vivo sunscreen immune protection factors in a manner analogous with sun protection factor measurement. Sunscreens were found to confer significantly less protection against UV-induced immunosuppression than against UV-induced erythema.

UV-induced immune suppression and sunscreen.

Sun protection factor (SPF) that measures sunscreen protection against erythema and edema may not be enough to measure a sunscreen's activity against many other biologic reactions induced by ultraviolet radiation (UV). It may be better to evaluate sunscreen efficacy using various tools including immune protection factor (IPF), mutation protection factor (MPF) and protection against photocarcinogenesis. In terms of immune protection, sunscreens protected against UV-induced immune suppression significantly. But protection in some cases was partial and often the IPF of sunscreens were less than the SPF. IPF may differ with various immunological endpoints, and it may be better to use a couple of different assays to measure sunscreen protection more objectively. Sunscreen use protects against most UV-induced non-melanoma skin cancers and actinic keratoses but its activity against melanoma is not clear. More studies with broad-spectrum stable sunscreens and better models for the investigation of malignant melanoma are required.

UV‐induced immune suppression and sunscreen

Sun protection factor (SPF) that measures sunscreen protection against erythema and edema may not be enough to measure a sunscreen's activity against many other biologic reactions induced by ultraviolet radiation (UV). It may be better to evaluate sunscreen efficacy using various tools including immune protection factor (IPF), mutation protection factor (MPF) and protection against photocarcinogenesis. In terms of immune protection, sunscreens protected against UV‐induced immune suppression significantly. But protection in some cases was partial and often the IPF of sunscreens were less than the SPF. IPF may differ with various immunological endpoints, and it may be better to use a couple of different assays to measure sunscreen protection more objectively. Sunscreen use protects against most UV‐induced non‐melanoma skin cancers and actinic keratoses but its activity against melanoma is not clear. More studies with broad‐spectrum stable sunscreens and better models for the investigation of malignant melanoma are required.

Improved Protection Against Solar-Simulated Radiation-Induced Immunosuppression by a Sunscreen with Enhanced Ultraviolet A Protection

Ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression is thought to play a part in skin cancer. Several studies have indicated that sunscreens that are designed to protect against erythema failed to give comparable protection against ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression. One possible reason for this discrepancy is inadequate ultraviolet A protection. This study evaluated the level of immunoprotection in mice afforded by two broad-spectrum sunscreens with the same sun protection factor, but with different ultraviolet A protection factors. Both sunscreens contained the same ultraviolet B and ultraviolet A filters, in the same vehicle, but at different concentrations. Solar simulated radiation dose-response curves for erythema, edema, and systemic suppression of contact hypersensitivity were generated and used to derive protection factors for each end-point. The results of three different techniques for determining immune protection factor were compared. A comparison of the two sunscreens showed that the protection factor for erythema in mice was similar to that determined in humans (sun protection factor) but the protection factor for edema in mice was lower. Both sunscreens protected against suppression of contact hypersensitivity but the product with the higher ultraviolet A-protection factor showed significantly greater protection. The three techniques for determining immunoprotection gave very similar results for a given sunscreen, but immune protection factor was always lower than sun protection factor. These data suggest that sun protection factor may not predict the ability of sunscreens to protect the immune system and that a measure of ultraviolet A protection may also be necessary.

Measurement of In Vivo Sunscreen Immune Protection Factors in Humans

This study investigates the level of protection provided by sunscreens against solar-simulated UV radiation-induced immunosuppression in humans. The in vivo immune protection factors (IPF) of two broad-spectrum sunscreens were determined by assessing their ability to prevent UV-induced suppression of nickel contact hypersensitivity (CHS) in 15 nickel-allergic volunteers. Each volunteer was irradiated on unprotected skin of the back with different doses of UV daily for 4 days. Multiples of these UV doses were concurrently delivered to sunscreen-treated sites on the contralateral back. Nickel patches were then applied to both irradiated sites and adjacent, unirradiated control sites. Nickel-induced erythema at each site was measured 72 h later with a reflectance spectrometer. Comparison of the nickel reactions of irradiated and unirradiated skin revealed linear UV dose-responses for immunosuppression in both unprotected and sunscreen-treated skin. The minimum level of immunosuppression that can be reliably detected with this method is 20%. Therefore, the UV dose that reduces mean nickel CHS by 20% is the minimal immune suppression dose (MISD). Sunscreen IPF were determined by dividing the mean MISD of sunscreen-treated skin by that of unprotected skin. The sunscreens, with sun protection factors of 9 and 24, had IPF of 6.5 and > 25, respectively.

Measurement of In Vivo Sunscreen Immune Protection Factors in Humans

This study investigates the level of protection provided by sunscreens against solar-simulated UV radiation-induced immunosuppression in humans. The in vivo immune protection factors (IPF) of two broad-spectrum sunscreens were determined by assessing their ability to prevent UV-induced suppression of nickel contact hypersensitivity (CHS) in 15 nickel-allergic volunteers. Each volunteer was irradiated on unprotected skin of the back with different doses of UV daily for 4 days. Multiples of these UV doses were concurrently delivered to sunscreen-treated sites on the contralateral back. Nickel patches were then applied to both irradiated sites and adjacent, unirradiated control sites. Nickel-induced erythema at each site was measured 72 h later with a reflectance spectrometer. Comparison of the nickel reactions of irradiated and unirradiated skin revealed linear UV dose–responses for immunosuppression in both unprotected and sunscreen-treated skin. The minimum level of immunosuppression that can be reliably detected with this method is 20%. Therefore, the UV dose that reduces mean nickel CHS by 20% is the minimal immune suppression dose (MISD). Sunscreen IPF were determined by dividing the mean MISD of sunscreen-treated skin by that of unprotected skin. The sunscreens, with sun protection factors of 9 and 24, had IPF of 6.5 and >25, respectively.

Sunscreens and vitamin E provide some protection to the skin immune system from solar-simulated UV radiation.

Previous studies have indicated that sunscreens designed to protect from erythema do not adequately prevent immunosuppression. Mice were irradiated with suberythemal doses of solar-simulated ultraviolet radiation (ssUVR) to assess the immunoprotective ability of sunscreens. Whereas C3H/HeJ and BALB/c mice had similar sensitivities to ssUVR-induced inflammation, C3H/HeJ mice were more sensitive to ssUVR-induced immunosuppression. Octyl dimethyl-p-aminobenzoic acid did not protect from immunosuppression and, thus, had an immune protection factor (IPF) of 1. 2-Ethylhexyl-p-methoxycinnamate and microfine titanium dioxide provided limited protection, both having IPF values of 1.127. Immune protection by the sunscreens appeared to be dependent upon absorption of UVA as well as UVB, and was much less than predicted from the sun protection factor. Vitamin E, an inhibitor of lipid peroxidation, also protected the immune system, with an IPF of 1.2, indicating that oxidation of lipids is involved in UVR-induced immunosuppression, and that it should be possible to develop sunscreens which protect the immune system.

Sunscreens prevent local and systemic immunosuppression of contact hypersensitivity in mice exposed to solar-simulated ultraviolet radiation

Ultraviolet (UV) irradiation causes the immunosuppression of contact hypersensitivity (CH) responses in animals and humans. There are conflicting reports regarding the effectiveness of sunscreens in preventing UV-induced suppression of both local-type CH (induced by the application of the contact sensitizer directly to UV-exposed skin) and systemic-type CH (induced by the application of the contact sensitizer to an unirradiated skin site 3 days after UV exposure). The purposes of this study were as follows: 1. 1. to derive solar simulator UV dose-response curves for the induction of local and systemic CH suppression in C3H mice; 2. 2. to establish minimum immune suppression doses (MISDs) for local and systemic CH; 3. 3. to determine the local and systemic immune protection capacity of two commercial sunscreen lotions with labeled sun protection factors (SPFs) of 4 and 8. Dose-response curves for the induction of local and systemic CH suppression were derived by exposing groups of mice to a range of full-spectrum UV doses (0.37–21.4 kJ m −2) on two consecutive days delivered from a filtered 1000 W xenon arc lamp solar simulator. The MISDs, defined as the lowest dose tested to cause approximately 50% suppression of the normal CH response, were obtained from the dose-response curves. Although the local and systemic immunosuppression dose-response curves were not statistically different, the MISD for local suppression of CH (1.35 kJ m −2) was about fivefold lower than that for systemic CH suppression (6.76 kJ m −2). The MISD was used as the endpoint to determine sunscreen immune protection levels. Both sunscreens, applied at 2 mg cm −2, provided immune protection against the induction of local and systemic CH suppression in mice exposed to an effective UV dose of 1 MISD giventhrough the sunscreen, i.e. 4 MISD to SPF 4 sunscreen-protected mice and 8 MISD to SPF 8 sunscreen-protected mice mounted CH responses that were significantly greater than those elicited in unprotected mice exposed to 1 MISD of solar-simulated UV radiation. The calculated immune protection factors for these sunscreens exceeded the level of protection predicted by their labeled SPFs, i.e. the local immune protection factor of both sunscreens was 15 and the systemic immune protection factors were 8 for the SPF4 sunscreen and 15 for the SPF 8 sunscreen. Our data show that these two sunscreens provide levels of immune protection which exceed the levels predicted by their labeled SPFs in immunoprotection tests conducted in mice exposed to a relevant MISD of UV radiation from a source emitting a UV power spectrum similar to that of sunlight.

Immunologic Protection Afforded by Sunscreens In Vitro

Several studies have suggested a lack of correlation between sunscreen sun protection factor and protection of the skin immune system, potentially allowing greater damage to the skin by removing the natural protective erythemal response to sun exposure. Despite this, routine testing of immune protection afforded by sunscreens is not performed by industry. Current laboratory methods for investigating the efficacy of sunscreen protection of epidermal immune function use the induction of contact hypersensitivity or epidermal cell alloantigen presentation. Animal models, cell culture systems, and in vivo human studies are commonly employed, but all these systems have significant drawbacks for use in routine testing. The purpose of this study was to develop an in vitro system for testing the immunologic protection afforded by sunscreens in human skin. Five test sunscreens plus a vehicle control were tested in a "blind" fashion for their in vitro level of immune protection. Creams were applied in a standard manner to human whole skin explants and were irradiated over a range of physiologic doses using an Oriel solar simulator. A mixed epidermal lymphocyte reaction was used to quantify epidermal alloantigen-presenting capacity, in the presence or absence of test cream, for five explants. Results consistently demonstrated that all the test sunscreens protected beyond their designated sun protection factors, whereas the vehicle conferred no protection. The explant-mixed epidermal lymphocyte reaction system gave consistent, reproducible results and may prove useful for the allocation of an immune protection factor to all sunscreens.

Evaluation of an economical sunlamp that emits a near solar UV power spectrum for conducting photoimmunological and sunscreen immune protection studies.

Expense and inconvenience have restricted the use of the filtered xenon are lamp (solar simulator) as a UV source for conducting large-scale animal studies. Because sunscreen immunoprotective levels are significantly affected by the UV power spectrum of the source it is imperative that a solar simulating source be used for accurate measurements of sunscreen protection levels that are relevant to human LV exposures from sunlight. However, relatively inexpensive sunlamps, e.g. the UVA-340, that emit a UV power spectrum similar to that of a solar simulator are available. Unlike FS-type UVB sunlamps, which have a significant amount of effective immunosuppressive non-solar UV energy at wavelengths below 295 nm, the immunosuppression effectiveness spectrum of UVA-340 sunlamps was nearly identical to that of a solar simulator. The purpose of this study was to evaluate this sunlamp for conducting photoimmunological and sunscreen immune protection studies. Groups of C3H mice were exposed to a range of UVA-340 sunlamp doses (0.25 kJ/m2 to 20.0 kJ/m2) to establish a dose-response curve and determine the minimum immune suppression dose (MISD) for iduction of local-type suppression of contact hypersensitivity (CH). The MISD, defined as the lowest UV dose given to produce approximately 50% suppression of the CH response in mice, was determined to be 1.0 kJ/m2 for UVA-340 sunlamps. Immune protection tests on four marketed sunscreen lotions (sun protection factors [SPF] 4, 8, 15 and 30) were then conducted with UVA-340 sunlamps using MISD as the endpoint. The immune protection factors for these sunscreens were equivalent to the level of protection predicted by their labeled SPF. These results are similar to those we have previously obtained using a solar simulator. We conclude from these data that the immunosuppressive effects of UVA-340 sunlamps are similar to those of a solar simulator; however, further studies are needed to determine if UVA-340, or similar, sunlamps are a viable alternative to the solar simulator for conducting large-scale animal experiments that require a relevant UV solar spectrum.

Ultraviolet spectral energy differences affect the ability of sunscreen lotions to prevent ultraviolet-radiation-induced immunosuppression.

Acute exposure to UV radiation causes immunosuppression of contact hypersensitivity (CH) responses. Past studies conducted with unfiltered sunlamps emitting nonsolar spectrum UV power (wavelengths below 295 nm) or using excessive UV doses have suggested sunscreens may not prevent UV-induced immunosuppression in mice. This study was thus designed to evaluate critically the effects of different UV energy spectra on the immune protection capacity of sunscreen lotions. Minimum immune suppression doses (MISD), i.e. the lowest UV dose to cause approximately 50% suppression of the CH response to dinitrofluorobenzene in C3H mice, were established for three artificial UV sources. The MISD for each UV source was 0.25 kJ/m2 for unfiltered FS20 sunlamps (FS), 0.90 kJ/m2 for Kodacel-filtered FS20 sunlamps (KFS), which do not emit UV power at wavelengths < 290 nm, and 1.35 kJ/m2 for a 1000 W filtered xenon arc lamp solar simulator. Using MISD as baseline, sunscreens with labeled sun protection factors (SPF) of 4, 8, 15 and 30 were tested with each UV source to establish their relative immune protection factors. The immune protection factor of each sunscreen exceeded its labeled SPF in tests conducted with the solar simulator, which has a UV power spectrum (295-400 nm) similar to that of sunlight. Conversely, sunscreen immune protection factors were significantly less than the labeled SPF in tests conducted with FS and KFS. Comparison of the immunosuppression effectiveness spectra showed that relatively small amounts of nonsolar spectrum UV energy, i.e. UVC (200-290 nm) and/or shorter wavelength UVB (between 290 and 295 nm), produced by FS and KFS contributes significantly to the induction of immunosuppression. For example, 36.3% and 3.5% of the total immunosuppressive UV energy from FS and KFS, respectively, lies below 295 nm. Sunscreen absorption spectra showed that transmission of immunosuppressive UV energy below 295 nm for FS was at least eight-fold higher than that for KFS. Compared to the solar simulator UV spectrum the transmission of nonsolar immunosuppressive UV energy through sunscreens was > 15-fold higher for FS and > or = 1.5-fold higher for KFS. These data demonstrate that relevant evaluations of sunscreen immune protection can only be obtained when tests are conducted with UV sources that produce UV power spectra similar to that of sunlight and UV doses are employed that are based on established MISD.