Facial skin barrier function recovery after microneedle transdermal delivery treatment.

BACKGROUND: Microneedle treatment is currently used in the cosmetic industry for several skin conditions. Despite their extensive use, there is lack of sufficient data on the safety of microneedles. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the degree of acute skin damage and the time required for facial skin barrier function to recover using different microneedle lengths and numbers of applications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Each side of a volunteer's face was randomly treated with one of the following treatments: five applications of 0.15-mm microneedles, five applications of 0.25-mm microneedles, 10 applications of 0.15-mm microneedles, or 10 applications of 0.25-mm microneedles. Transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, and skin erythema were measured at baseline, immediately after treatment, 4 hours after treatment, and 8 hours after treatment and at 24-hour intervals for 3 days. RESULTS: Prompt recovery of barrier function (within 72 hours) was observed after microneedle treatment. CONCLUSION: Microneedle treatment is simple and inexpensive, and the skin barrier disruption it causes resolves quickly. Therefore, it can serve as an effective physical method of enhancing transdermal delivery of medications for the treatment of many cosmetic and dermatological conditions.

Efficacy and Safety of Modified Pranlukast (Prakanon(®)) Compared with Pranlukast (Onon(®)): A Randomized, Open-Label, Crossover Study.

INTRODUCTION: Pranlukast is a leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) that is used as an additional controller of mild to moderate asthma. This study compared the efficacy and side effects of two bioequivalent preparations of pranlukast: original pranlukast (Onon(®); Ono Pharmaceutical, Japan) and a modified formulation of pranlukast (Prakanon(®); Yuhan Co, Korea) in patients with mild to moderate asthma. METHODS: Of the 34 subjects screened, 30 patients who were using standard medication to control asthma and scored less than 20 points on the Asthma Control Test(™) (ACT) were assigned randomly to one of the two groups in a prospective, open label, crossover study: group 1 received Prakanon(®) (150 mg/day) and group 2 received Onon(®) (450 mg/day) for 8 weeks each; after a 1-week rest period, the groups were switched to the alternative medication for further 8 weeks and monitored for 2 more weeks without study medication. Evaluation parameters included the ACT, quality of life questionnaire adult Korean asthmatics (QLQAKA), pulmonary function tests, peripheral blood tests, vital signs, and adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled and 21 completed the trial: 10 in group 1 and 11 in group 2. The baseline data of the two groups did not differ. No statistical significant differences were observed in efficacy and lung function at each time and in changes from baseline value between the two kinds of pranlukast. The final asthma control rate was 81% with Prakanon(®) and 76% with Onon(®). There were no differences in vital signs and laboratory data at each time and in changes from baseline value between the two drugs. There were no differences in adverse events between the two drugs. The most common side effect was abdominal pain. Drug compliance was high, without differences between the two drugs. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that Prakanon(®) which is an improved formulation of pranlukast at a lower dose than the original formulation, Onon(®), has a similar efficacy and side effect profile in the control of persistent asthma.