Are there any differences in skin barrier function, integrity and skin blood flow between different subpopulations of Asians and Caucasians?

Exogenous Dermatology

Volumn 1, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 302-306

  Yosipovitch, Gil ^a,c   Goon, A T J ^a   Chan, Y H ^b   Goh, C L ^a  

^a NATIONAL SKIN CENTRE   (Singapore)

^b Clinical Trials and Epidemiology Research Unit   (Singapore)

^c WAKE FOREST BAPTIST HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Ethnic differences; Skin barrier function; Skin type

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASIAN; CAUCASIAN; CELL TYPE; CHINESE; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; FEMALE; GENDER; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INDIAN; LASER DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; LASER DOPPLER PERFUSION IMAGING; MALAY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RACE; SEX DIFFERENCE; SKIN; SKIN BLOOD FLOW; SKIN FUNCTION; SKIN PERMEABILITY; SKIN WATER LOSS;

EID: 0037499830     PISSN: 14244616     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000069882     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Wilson D, Berardesca E, Maibach HI: In vitro transcpidermal water loss: Differences between black and white human skin. Br J Dermatol 1988; 119:647-652.
2. Bcrardesca E, Maibach HI: Racial differences in sodium lauryl sulphate induced cutaneous irritation: Black and white. Contact Dermatitis 1988;18:65-70.
3. Berardesca E, de Rigal J, Leveque J, Maibach HI: In vivo biophysical characterization of skin physiological differences in races. Dermatologica 1991;82:89-93.
4. Kornpaore F, Marty JP, Dupont C: In vivo evaluation of the stratum corneum barrier function in blacks, Caucasians and Asians with two noninvasive methods. Skin Pharmacol 1993;6:200-207.
5. Reed JT, Ghadially R, Elias PM: Skin type, but neither race nor gender, influence epidermal permeability barrier function. Arch Dermatol 1996;131:1134-1138.
6. Rapaport MJ: Patch testing in Japanese subjects. Contact Dermatitis 1984; 11:93-97.
7. Basketter D, Griffiths HA, Wang XM, et al: Individual, ethnic and seasonal variability in irritant susceptibility of skin: The implications for a predictive human patch. Contact Dermatitis 1996;35:208-213.
8. Goh CL, Chia SE: Skin irritability to sodium lauryl sulphate - As measured by skin water vapour loss. Clin Exp Dermatol 1988;13:16-19.
9. Fitzpatrick TB: The validity and practicality of sun reactive skin type I through VI. Arch Dermatol 1988; 124:869-871.
10. Pinnagoda J, Pupker RA, Agner T, Serup J: Guidelines for transepidermal water loss (TEWL) measurement. Contact Dermatitis 1990;22:164-178.
11. Aramaki J, Kawana S, Effendy I, et al: Differences of skin irritation between Japanese and European women. Br J Dermatol 2002;146: 1052-1056.
12. Robinson MK: Population differences in skin structure and physiology and the susceptibility to irritant and allergic contact dermatitis: Implications for skin safety testing and risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 1999;41:65-79.
13. Abbot NC, Ferrell WR, Lockhart JC, Lowe G: Laser Doppler perfusion imaging of skin blood flow using red and near infrared sources. J Invest Dermatol 1996; 107:882-886.