Sunscreen applied at ≥ 2 mg cm-2 during a sunny holiday prevents erythema, a biomarker of ultraviolet radiation-induced DNA damage and suppression of acquired immunity.

BACKGROUND: Sun protection factor (SPF) is assessed with sunscreen applied at 2 mg cm-2 . People typically apply around 0·8 mg cm-2 and use sunscreen daily for holidays. Such use results in erythema, which is a risk factor for skin cancer. OBJECTIVES: To determine (i) whether typical sunscreen use resulted in erythema, epidermal DNA damage and photoimmunosuppression during a sunny holiday, (ii) whether optimal sunscreen use inhibited erythema and (iii) whether erythema is a biomarker for photoimmunosuppression in a laboratory study. METHODS: Holidaymakers (n = 22) spent a week in Tenerife (very high ultraviolet index) using their own sunscreens without instruction (typical sunscreen use). Others (n = 40) were given SPF 15 sunscreens with instructions on how to achieve the labelled SPF (sunscreen intervention). Personal ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure was monitored electronically as the standard erythemal dose (SED) and erythema was quantified. Epidermal cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) were determined by immunostaining, and immunosuppression was assessed by contact hypersensitivity (CHS) response. RESULTS: There was no difference between personal UVR exposure in the typical sunscreen use and sunscreen intervention groups (P = 0·08). The former had daily erythema on five UVR-exposed body sites, increased CPDs (P < 0·001) and complete CHS suppression (20 of 22). In comparison, erythema was virtually absent (P < 0·001) when sunscreens were used at ≥ 2 mg cm-2 . A laboratory study showed that 3 SED from three very different spectra suppressed CHS by around ~50%. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal sunscreen use prevents erythema during a sunny holiday. Erythema predicts suppression of CHS (implying a shared action spectrum). Given that erythema and CPDs share action spectra, the data strongly suggest that optimal sunscreen use will also reduce CPD formation and UVR-induced immunosuppression.

Optimal sunscreen use, during a sun holiday with a very high ultraviolet index, allows vitamin D synthesis without sunburn.

BACKGROUND: Sunlight contains ultraviolet (UV)A and UVB radiation. UVB is essential for vitamin D synthesis but is the main cause of sunburn and skin cancer. Sunscreen use is advocated to reduce the sun's adverse effects but may compromise vitamin D status. OBJECTIVES: To assess the ability of two intervention sunscreens to inhibit vitamin D synthesis during a week-long sun holiday. METHODS: The impact of sunscreens on vitamin D status was studied during a 1-week sun holiday in Tenerife (28° N). Comparisons were made between two formulations, each with a sun protection factor (SPF) of 15. The UVA-protection factor (PF) was low in one case and high in the other. Healthy Polish volunteers (n = 20 per group) were given the sunscreens and advised on the correct application. Comparisons were also made with discretionary sunscreen use (n = 22) and nonholiday groups (51·8° N, n = 17). Sunscreen use in the intervention groups was measured. Behaviour, UV radiation exposure, clothing cover and sunburn were monitored. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 [25(OH)D3 ] was assessed by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Use of intervention sunscreens was the same (P = 0·60), and both equally inhibited sunburn, which was present in the discretionary use group. There was an increase (P < 0·001) in mean ± SD 25(OH)D3 (28·0 ± 16·5 nmol L-1 ) in the discretionary use group. The high and low UVA-PF sunscreen groups showed statistically significant increases (P < 0·001) of 19·0 ± 14·2 and 13·0 ± 11·4 nmol L-1 25(OH)D3 , respectively with P = 0·022 for difference between the intervention sunscreens. The nonholiday group showed a fall (P = 0·08) of 2·5 ± 5·6 nmol L-1 25(OH)D3 . CONCLUSIONS: Sunscreens may be used to prevent sunburn yet allow vitamin D synthesis. A high UVA-PF sunscreen enables significantly higher vitamin D synthesis than a low UVA-PF sunscreen because the former, by default, transmits more UVB than the latter. What's already known about this topic? Action spectra (wavelength dependence) for erythema and the cutaneous formation of vitamin D overlap considerably in the ultraviolet (UV)B region. Theoretically, sunscreens that inhibit erythema should also inhibit vitamin D synthesis. To date, studies on the inhibitory effects of sunscreens on vitamin D synthesis have given conflicting results, possibly, in part, because people typically apply sunscreen suboptimally. Many studies have design flaws. What does this study add? Sunscreens (sun protection factor, SPF 15) applied at sufficient thickness to inhibit sunburn during a week-long holiday with a very high UV index still allow a highly significant improvement of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 concentration. An SPF 15 formulation with high UVA protection enables better vitamin D synthesis than a low UVA protection product. The former allows more UVB transmission.

Children sustain high levels of skin DNA photodamage, with a modest increase of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 , after a summer holiday in Northern Europe.

BACKGROUND: Childhood solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure increases the risk of skin cancer in adulthood, which is associated with mutations caused by UVR-induced cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPD). Solar UVR is also the main source of vitamin D, essential for healthy bone development in children. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of a 12-day Baltic Sea (54° N) beach holiday on serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 [25(OH)D3 ] and CPD in 32 healthy Polish children (skin types I-IV). METHODS: Blood and urine were collected before and after the holiday and assessed for 25(OH)D3 and excreted CPD, respectively, and personal UVR exposure was measured. Diaries were used to record sunbathing, sunburn and sunscreen use. Before- and after-holiday skin redness and pigmentation were measured by reflectance spectroscopy. RESULTS: The average ± SD daily exposure UVR dose was 2·4 ± 1·5 standard erythema doses (SEDs), which is borderline erythemal. The mean concentration of 25(OH)D3 increased (× 1·24 ± 0·19) from 64·7 ± 13·3 to 79·3 ± 18·7 nmol L-1 (P < 0·001). Mean CPD increased 12·6 ± 10·0-fold from 26·9 ± 17·9 to 248·9 ± 113·4 fmol µmol-1 creatinine (P < 0·001). Increased 25(OH)D3 was accompanied by a very much greater increase in DNA damage associated with carcinogenic potential. Overall, skin type had no significant effects on behavioural, clinical or analytical outcomes, but skin types I/II had more CPD (unadjusted P = 0·0496) than skin types III/IV at the end of the holiday. CONCLUSIONS: Careful consideration must be given to the health outcomes of childhood solar exposure, and a much better understanding of the risk-benefit relationships of such exposure is required. Rigorous photoprotection is necessary for children, even in Northern Europe.

Suberythemal ultraviolet B radiation alters the expression of cell cycle-related proteins in the epidermis of human subjects without leading to photoprotection.

BACKGROUND: Deregulation of the cell cycle proteins is one of the critical factors leading to cutaneous carcinogenesis. OBJECTIVES: To monitor the expression of cell cycle proteins in the epidermis of subjects after repeated exposure to ultraviolet (UV) B radiation, and to test for the development of photoprotection by subsequent irradiation with a single erythemal UVB dose. METHODS: A total of 26 healthy volunteers were divided into four groups: group 1 (n = 9) were given whole-body UVB irradiation for 10 consecutive days with 0.7 minimal erythema dose (MED), group 2 (n = 9) were irradiated as in group 1 followed 24 h later by a single UVB dose of 3 MED on buttock skin, group 3 (n = 4) were irradiated with a UVB dose of 3 MED on buttock skin, and group 4 (n = 4) were not irradiated. Skin biopsies were collected 24 h after the final irradiation and stained for cyclins A, B1, D1, and p16, p18, p21, p27, p53, pRB, Bax and Bcl-2. RESULTS: The expression of cyclin D1, p18 and p21 was significantly higher in groups 1 and 2 compared with the nonirradiated group 4 controls and, in group 2, the expression of pRB, p53 and Bax was also increased. In group 3, only p53 and Bax proteins were significantly elevated compared with group 4. The expression of cyclin D1, p16, p18, p27, pRB and Bcl-2 was higher in group 2 compared with group 3. CONCLUSIONS: Suberythemal UVB radiation was sufficient to cause changes in the expression of several epidermal cell cycle proteins. When tested by irradiation with a single erythemal UVB dose following the repeated exposures, no photoprotection against the UV-induced alteration in cell cycle protein expression was apparent.

Personal UVR exposure of farming families in four European countries.

BACKGROUND: The main risk factor for skin cancer is ultraviolet radiation (UVR). Farming families living in rural areas with easy outdoor access may experience excessive UVR exposure. Differences between countries in latitude, altitude and sun behaviour could result in different personal UVR exposures. However, no studies have examined this until now. OBJECTIVES: To determine personal UVR exposure in work and leisure situations among farming families in Europe. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of farmers, their partners (spouses) and children in Denmark (DK), Poland (PL), Austria (AT), and Spain (ES) from 2009 to 2011. Personal UVR exposure and sun behaviour were recorded by dosimetry and diaries. RESULTS: Farmers' average daily UVR exposure on working days ranged from 1.4 SED (DK, AT) to 2.7 SED (ES). Corresponding figures for partners were: 0.6 SED (DK) to 1.9 SED (PL), and for children (day-care/school days): 0.7 SED (ES) to 1.3 SED (PL). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Farmers' UVR exposure was comparable to that of outdoor workers in previous studies and exceeded the recommended UVR exposure limits on 36% (DK, AT), 29% (PL) and 56% (ES) of their working days. Attention to sun protection for outdoor workers across Europe in preventing UVR-induced skin cancer is still needed.