Sensitive skin: Closing in on a physiological cause

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 137-149

  Farage, Miranda A ^a   Maibach, Howard I ^b  

^a PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Atopic dermatitis; Behind the knee test; Calibrated electrical stimulation; Cross polarized light; Enhanced visualization; Erythema; Irritation; Magnetic resonance imaging; Patch testing; Sensitive skin; Skin temperature

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; BENZOIC ACID; CAFFEINE; COSMETIC; DODECYL SULFATE SODIUM; HORMONE; INTERLEUKIN 1; INTERLEUKIN 8; IRRITANT AGENT; LACTIC ACID; LIPID; METHACHOLINE CHLORIDE; NICOTINIC ACID METHYL ESTER; PROSTAGLANDIN E2; PROSTAGLANDIN F2; SOAP; SPHINGOLIPID; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR ALPHA; WATER;

AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGING; ANTIGEN PRESENTING CELL; ASIAN; ATOPY; BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; CAUCASIAN; CELL COUNT; CELL DISRUPTION; CELL STRUCTURE; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASE; COLD SENSITIVITY; CULTURAL FACTOR; CYTOKINE PRODUCTION; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE PREDISPOSITION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EPIDERMIS; ERYTHEMA; ETHNICITY; FLUSHING; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GENITAL SYSTEM; HEAT SENSITIVITY; HUMAN; HUMIDITY; HYDRATION; IMMUNOLOGY; INFLAMMATION; LIFESTYLE; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; MOISTURE; NERVE ENDING; NERVE POTENTIAL; NERVOUS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; NOCICEPTION; PATCH TEST; PHYSICAL STRESS; POLLUTION; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PREVALENCE; RACE DIFFERENCE; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; SELF REPORT; SENSORIMOTOR CORTEX; SENSORY EVALUATION; SEX RATIO; SKIN ABSORPTION; SKIN BLOOD VESSEL; SKIN BURNING SENSATION; SKIN DISCOMFORT; SKIN IRRITATION; SKIN NERVE; SKIN PENETRATION; SKIN PERMEABILITY; SKIN PIGMENTATION; SKIN PRURITUS; SKIN SENSITIVITY; SKIN STRUCTURE; SKIN TINGLING; SKIN WATER LOSS; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; SOMATOSENSORY SYSTEM; STRATUM CORNEUM; STRESS; SWEAT GLAND; TAMPON; THICKNESS; ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION; WIND; DERMATITIS, ATOPIC; FEMALE; MALE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SEX DIFFERENCE; SKIN; TOXICITY TESTING;

COSMETICS; DERMATITIS, ATOPIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATCH TESTS; SEX FACTORS; SKIN; SKIN IRRITANCY TESTS;

EID: 77649088873     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: 16000536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01697.x     Document Type: Review

References (104)

1. Farage M A. Are we reaching the limits or our ability to detect skin effects with our current testing and measuring methods for consumer products? Contact Dermatitis 2005 : 52 : 297 303.
2. Jourdain R, de Lacharrière O, Bastien P, Maibach H I. Ethnic variations in self-perceived sensitive skin: epidemiological survey. Contact Dermatitis 2002 : 46 : 162 169.
3. Saint-Martory C, Roguedas-Contios A M, Sibaud V, Degouy A, Schmitt A M, Misery L. Sensitive skin is not limited to the face. Br J Dermatol 2008 : 158 : 130 133.
4. Marriott M, Holmes J, Peters L, Cooper K, Rowson M, Basketter D A. The complex problem of sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis 2005 : 53 : 93 99.
5. Kligman A M, Sadiq I, Zhen Y, Crosby M. Experimental studies on the nature of sensitive skin. Skin Res Technol 2006 : 12 : 217 222.
6. Kligman A. Human models for characterizing "Sensitive Skin." Cosm Derm 2001 : 14 : 15 19.
7. Farage M A. How do perceptions of sensitive skin differ at different anatomical sites? An epidemiological study. Clin Exp Dermatol 2009 : 38 : e521 e530.
8. Johnson A, Page D. Making sense of sensitive skin. In: Congress of the International Federation of Society of Cosmetic Chemists, Yokohama, Japan, 1992 : Poster 700.
9. Morizot F, Guinot C, Lopez S, Le Fur I, Tschachler E, Wood C. Sensitive skin: analysis of symptoms, perceived causes and possible mechanisms. Cosmet Toiletries 2000 : 115 : 83 89.
10. Willis C M, Shaw S, De Lacharrière O, Baverel M, Reiche L, Jourdain R, Bastien P, Wilkinson J D. Sensitive skin: an epidemiological study. Br J Dermatol 2001 : 145 : 258 263.
11. Querleux B, Dauchot K, Jourdain R, Bastien P, Bittoun J, Anton J L, Burnod Y, de Lacharrière O. Neural basis of sensitive skin: an fMRI study. Skin Res Technol 2008 : 14 : 454 461.
12. Misery L, Myon E, Martin N, Verrière F, Nocera T, Taieb C. Sensitive skin in France: an epidemiological approach. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2005 : 132 : 425 429.
13. Guinot C, Malvy D, Mauger E et al. Self-reported skin sensitivity in a general adult population in France: data of the SU.VI.MAX cohort. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2006 : 20 : 380 390.
14. Farage M A, Bowtell P, Katsarou A. Self-diagnosed sensitive skin in women with clinically diagnosed atopic dermatitis. Clin Med Dermatol 2008 : 2 : 21 28.
15. Löffler H, Dickel H, Kuss O, Diepgen T L, Effendy I. Characteristics of self-estimated enhanced skin susceptibility. Acta Derm Venereol 2001 : 81 : 343 346.
16. Sparavigna A, Di Pietro A, Setaro M. 'Healthy skin': significance and results of an Italian study on healthy population with particular regard to 'sensitive' skin. Int J Cosmet Sci 2005 : 27 : 327 331.
17. Farage M A. Perceptions of sensitive skin: women with urinary incontinence. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2009 : 280 : 49 57.
18. Farage M A, Katsarou A, Maibach H I. Sensory, clinical and physiological factors in sensitive skin: a review. Contact Dermatitis 2006 : 55 : 1 14.
19. Singer N. Face it, princess, your skin is probably quite common. 2005. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/13/fashion/thursdaystyles/13skin. html (last accessed 20 August 2009).
20. Simion F A, Rhein L D, Morrison B M J, Scala D D, Salko D M, Kligman A M, Grove G L. Self-perceived sensory responses to soap and synthetic detergent bars correlate with clinical signs of irritation. J Am Acad Dermatol 1995 : 32 : 205 211.
21. Pons-Guiraud A. Sensitive skin: a complex and multifactorial syndrome. J Cosmet Dermatol 2004 : 3 : 145 148.
22. Chew A, Maibach H. Sensitive skin. In: Dry Skin and Moisturizers: Chemistry and Function, Loden M, Miabach H (eds): Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press, 2000 : 429 440.
23. Farage M A, Maibach H I. The vulvar epithelium differs from the skin: implications for cutaneous testing to address topical vulvar exposures. Contact Dermatitis 2004 : 51 : 201 209.
24. Cua A B, Wilhelm K P, Maibach H I. Cutaneous sodium lauryl sulphate irritation potential: age and regional variability. Br J Dermatol 1990 : 123 : 607 613.
25. Basketter D A, Wilhelm K P. Studies on non-immune immediate contact reactions in an unselected population. Contact Dermatitis 1996 : 35 : 237 240.
26. Lee C H, Maibach H I. The sodium lauryl sulfate model: an overview. Contact Dermatitis 1995 : 33 : 1 7.
27. Farage M A, Santana M, Henley E. Correlating sensory effects with irritation. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2005 : 24 : 45 52.
28. Robinson M K. Racial differences in acute and cumulative skin irritation responses between Caucasian and Asian populations. Contact Dermatitis 2000 : 42 : 134 143.
29. Sahlin A, Edlund F, Lodén M. A double-blind and controlled study on the influence of the vehicle on the skin susceptibility to stinging from lactic acid. Int J Cosmet Sci 2007 : 29 : 385 390.
30. Ständer S, Schneider S W, Weishaupt C, Luger T A, Misery L. Putative neuronal mechanisms of sensitive skin. Exp Dermatol 2009 : 18 : 417 423.
31. Primavera G, Berardesca E. Sensitive skin: mechanisms and diagnosis. Int J Cosmet Sci 2005 : 27 : 1 10.
32. Muizzuddin N, Marenus K D, Maes D H. Factors defining sensitive skin and its treatment. Am J Contact Dermat 1998 : 9 : 170 175.
33. Goffin V, Piérard-Franchimont C, Piérard G E. Sensitive skin and stratum corneum reactivity to household cleaning products. Contact Dermatitis 1996 : 34 : 81 85.
34. Roussaki-Schulze A V, Zafiriou E, Nikoulis D, Klimi E, Rallis E, Zintzaras E. Objective biophysical findings in patients with sensitive skin. Drugs Exp Clin Res 2005 : 31 : 17 24. (Pubitemid 43139617)
35. Ota M, Hikima R, Ogawa T. Physiological characteristics of sensitive skin classified by stinging test. J Jpn Cosmet Sci Soc 2000 : 24 : 163 167.
36. Farage M A. Assessing the skin irritation potential of facial tissues. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2005 : 24 : 125 135.
37. Farage M A. Perceptions of sensitive skin: changes in perceived severity and associations with environmental causes. Contact Dermatitis 2008 : 59 : 226 232.
38. Britz M B, Maibach H I, Anjo D M. Human percutaneous penetration of hydrocortisone: the vulva. Arch Dermatol Res 1980 : 267 : 313 316.
39. Farage M A, Stadler A. Risk factors for recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005 : 192 : 981 982 author reply 982 983.
40. Berardesca E, Maibach H I. Racial differences in sodium lauryl sulphate induced cutaneous irritation: black and white. Contact Dermatitis 1988 : 18 : 65 70.
41. Aramaki J, Kawana S, Effendy I, Happle R, Löffler H. Differences of skin irritation between Japanese and European women. Br J Dermatol 2002 : 146 : 1052 1056.
42. Freeman R G, Cockerell E G, Armstrong J, Knox J M. Sunlight as a factor influencing the thickness of epidermis. J Invest Dermatol 1962 : 39 : 295 298.
43. Thomson M L. Relative efficiency of pigment and horny layer thickness in protecting the skin of Europeans and Africans against solar ultraviolet radiation. J Physiol 1955 : 127 : 236 246.
44. Johnson L C, Corah N L. Racial differences in skin resistance. Science 1963 : 139 : 766 767.
45. Corcuff P, Lotte C, Rougier A, Maibach H I. Racial differences in corneocytes. A comparison between black, white and oriental skin. Acta Derm Venereol 1991 : 71 : 146 148.
46. Löffler H, Effendy I. Skin susceptibility of atopic individuals. Contact Dermatitis 1999 : 40 : 239 242.
47. Marriott M, Whittle E, Basketter D A. Facial variations in sensory responses. Contact Dermatitis 2003 : 49 : 227 231.
48. Lampe M A, Burlingame A L, Whitney J, Williams M L, Brown B E, Roitman E, Elias P M. Human stratum corneum lipids: characterization and regional variations. J Lipid Res 1983 : 24 : 120 130.
49. Seidenari S, Francomano M, Mantovani L. Baseline biophysical parameters in subjects with sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis 1998 : 38 : 311 315.
50. Reinertson R P, Wheatley V R. Studies on the chemical composition of human epidermal lipids. J Invest Dermatol 1959 : 32 : 49 59.
51. Brod J. Characterization and physiological role of epidermal lipids. Int J Dermatol 1991 : 30 : 84 90.
52. Elias P, Menon G. Structural and lipid biochemical correlates of the epidermal permeability barrier. In: Advances in Lipid Research, Elias P (ed.): San Diego, CA, Academic Press, 1991 : 1 25.
53. Swartzendruber D C, Wertz P W, Kitko D J, Madison K C, Downing D T. Molecular models of the intercellular lipid lamellae in mammalian stratum corneum. J Invest Dermatol 1989 : 92 : 251 257.
54. Farage M A. Self-reported immunological and familial links in individuals who perceive they have sensitive skin. Br J Dermatol 2008 : 159 : 237 238.
55. Sandby-Møller J, Poulsen T, Wulf H C. Epidermal thickness at different body sites: relationship to age, gender, pigmentation, blood content, skin type and smoking habits. Acta Derm Venereol 2003 : 83 : 410 413.
56. Farage M A. Vulvar susceptibility to contact irritants and allergens: a review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2005 : 272 : 167 172.
57. Farage M A. Perceptions of sensitive skin with age. In: Textbook of Aging Skin, Farage M A, Miller K W, Maibach H I (eds): Berlin-Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 2010 : 1027 1046.
58. Berardesca E, Maibach H. Racial differences in skin pathophysiology. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996 : 34 : 667 672.
59. Bronaugh R L, Stewart R F, Simon M. Methods for in vitro percutaneous absorption studies. VII: use of excised human skin. J Pharm Sci 1986 : 75 : 1094 1097.
60. Hymes J, Spraker M. Racial differences in the effectiveness of a topically applied mixutre of local anesthetics. Reg Anesth 1986 : 11 : 11 13.
61. Wedig J H, Maibach H I. Percutaneous penetration of dipyrithione in man: effect of skin color (race). J Am Acad Dermatol 1981 : 5 : 433 438.
62. Kompaore F, Marty J P, 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.
63. Guy R H, Tur E, Bjerke S, Maibach H I. Are there age and racial differences to methyl nicotinate-induced vasodilatation in human skin. J Am Acad Dermatol 1985 : 12 : 1001 1006.
64. Berardesca E, Maibach H I. Racial differences in pharmacodynamic response to nicotinates in vivo in human skin: black and white. Acta Derm Venereol 1990 : 70 : 63 66.
65. Wilson D, Berardesca E, Maibach H I. In vitro transepidermal water loss: differences between black and white human skin. Br J Dermatol 1988 : 119 : 647 652.
66. Sugino K, Imokawa G, Maibach H. Ethnic difference of stratum corneum lipid in prelation to stratum corneum function. J Invest Dermatol 1993 : 100 : 587 [Abstract 594].
67. Reed J T, Ghadially R, Elias P M. Skin type, but neither race nor gender, influence epidermal permeability barrier function. Arch Dermatol 1995 : 131 : 1134 1138.
68. Marshall E, Lynch V, Smith H. Variation in susceptibility of the skin to dichlorethylsulfide. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1919 : 12 : 291 301.
69. Weigand D, Mershon M. The cutaneous irritant reaction to agent o-chlorobenzylidene malonitrile (CS); quantitation and racial influence in human subjects. Edgewood Arsenal. February, 1970 : Number 4332.
70. Weigand D A, Gaylor J R. Irritant reaction in Negro and Caucasian skin. South Med J 1974 : 67 : 548 551.
71. Robinson M K. Population differences in acute skin irritation responses. Race, sex, age, sensitive skin and repeat subject comparisons. Contact Dermatitis 2002 : 46 : 86 93.
72. Grove G L. Physiologic changes in older skin. Clin Geriatr Med 1989 : 5 : 115 125.
73. Frosch P, Kligman A. A method for appraising the stinging capacity of topically applied substances. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1981 : 28 : 197 209.
74. Foy V, Weinkauf R, Whittle E, Basketter D A. Ethnic variation in the skin irritation response. Contact Dermatitis 2001 : 45 : 346 349.
75. Kaidbey K H, Agin P P, Sayre R M, Kligman A M. Photoprotection by melanin-a comparison of black and Caucasian skin. J Am Acad Dermatol 1979 : 1 : 249 260.
76. Anderson R R, Parrish J A. The optics of human skin. J Invest Dermatol 1981 : 77 : 13 19.
77. Berardesca E, de Rigal J, Leveque J L, Maibach H I. In vivo biophysical characterization of skin physiological differences in races. Dermatologica 1991 : 182 : 89 93.
78. Diridollou S, de Rigal J, Querleux B, Leroy F, Holloway Barbosa V. Comparative study of the hydration of the stratum corneum between four ethnic groups: influence of age. Int J Dermatol 2007 : 46 : 1 : 11 14. (Pubitemid 47534881)
79. McCurdy J. Cosmetic surgery of the Asian face. In: Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Paper I (ed.): New York, Thieme, 2002 : 322 343.
80. Nouveau-Richard S, Yang Z, Mac-Mary S et al. Skin ageing: a comparison between Chinese and European populations. A pilot study. J Dermatol Sci 2005 : 40 : 187 193.
81. Kelly A P. Aesthetic considerations in patients of color. Dermatol Clin 1997 : 15 : 687 693.
82. Edwards R R, Fillingim R B. Ethnic differences in thermal pain responses. Psychosom Med 1999 : 61 : 346 354.
83. Rawlings A V. Ethnic skin types: are there differences in skin structure and function. Int J Cosmet Sci 2006 : 28 : 79 93.
84. Warrier A, Kligman AM, Harpert R et al. A comparison of black and white skin using noninvasive methods. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1996 : 47 : 229 240.
85. Misery L, Myon E, Martin N, Consoli S, Boussetta S, Nocera T, Taieb C. Sensitive skin: psychological effects and seasonal changes. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2007 : 21 : 620 628.
86. Misery L, Sibaud V, Ambronati M, Macy G, Boussetta S, Taieb C. Sensitive scalp: does this condition exist? An epidemiological study. Contact Dermatitis 2008 : 58 : 234 238.
87. Farage M A, Bowtell P, Katsarou A. The relationship among objectively assessed vulvar erythema, skin sensitivity, genital sensitivity, and self-reported facial skin redness. J Appl Res 2006 : 6 : 272 281.
88. Vie K, Pons-Guiraud A, Dupuy P, Maibach H. Tolerance profile of a sterile moisturizer and moisturizing cleanser in irritated and sensitive skin. Am J Contact Dermat 2000 : 11 : 161 164.
89. Tagami H. Racial differences on skin barrier function. Cutis 2002 : 70 : 6 7 discussion 21 3.
90. Squier C A, Hall B K. The permeability of skin and oral mucosa to water and horseradish peroxidase as related to the thickness of the permeability barrier. J Invest Dermatol 1985 : 84 : 176 179.
91. Farage M A, Warren R, Wang-Weigand S. The vulva is relatively insensitive to menses-induced irritation. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2005 : 24 : 243 246.
92. Farage M A, Stadler A, Elsner P, Maibach H I. Safety evaluation of modern feminine hygiene pads: two decades of use. Female Patient 2004 : 29 : 23 30.
93. Marren P, Wojnarowska F, Powell S. Allergic contact dermatitis and vulvar dermatoses. Br J Dermatol 1992 : 126 : 52 56.
94. Farage M A. The Behind-the-Knee test: an efficient model for evaluating mechanical and chemical irritation. Skin Res Technol 2006 : 12 : 73 82.
95. Farage M A, Meyer S, Walter D. Evaluation of modifications of the traditional patch test in assessing the chemical irritation potential of feminine hygiene products. Skin Res Technol 2004 : 10 : 73 84.
96. Farage M A. Enhancement of visual scoring of skin irritant reactions using cross-polarized light and parallel-polarized light. Contact Dermatitis 2008 : 58 : 147 155.
97. Farage M A, Singh M, Ledger W F. Investigation of the sensitivity of a cross-polarized light system to detect subclinical erythema and dryness in women with vulvovaginitis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009 : v201 : 20 e1 e6 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.02.026 (Electronic before print).
98. Camel E, O'Connell M, Sage B, Gross M, Maibach H. The effect of saline iontophoresis on skin integrity in human volunteers. I. Methodology and reproducibility. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1996 : 32 : 168 178.
99. Perkins M A, Osterhues M A, Farage M A, Robinson M K. A noninvasive method to assess skin irritation and compromised skin conditions using simple tape adsorption of molecular markers of inflammation. Skin Res Technol 2001 : 7 : 227 237.
100. Farage M A, Bowtell P, Katsarou A. A pilot algorithm to identify patients likely to have atopic dermatitis. Am J Clin Dermatol 2010 (in press).
101. Besné I, Descombes C, Breton L. Effect of age and anatomical site on density of sensory innervation in human epidermis. Arch Dermatol 2002 : 138 : 1445 1450.
102. Kim S J, Lim S U, Won Y H, An S S, Lee E Y, Moon S J, Kim J. The perception threshold measurement can be a useful tool for evaluation of sensitive skin. Int J Cosmet Sci 2008 : 30 : 333 337.
103. Farage M A, Stadler A. Cumulative irritation patch test of sanitary pads on sensitive skin. J Cosmet Dermatol 2005 : 4 : 179 183.
104. Farage M A, Maibach H. Cumulative skin irritation test of sanitary pads in sensitive skin and normal skin population. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2007 : 26 : 37 43.