{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0256941566514712, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007045171985080812, 'mean_word_length': 5.18974358974359, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Efficacy of broad‐spectrum sunscreens against the suppression of elicitation of delayed‐type hypersensitivity responses in humans depends on the level of ultraviolet A protection

Abstract: Sunscreens have been designed to protect against sunburn and their efficacy has, therefore, been labeled by the so‐called sun protection factor (SPF). Although this value is well determined using a standardized protocol and it affords a good evaluation of the protection against erythema it may be inadequate to provide a relevant measurement of efficacy against other biologic damages. This is particularly true when action spectra and threshold dose are different from those of erythema. In the case of ultraviolet (UV)‐induced immune suppression, the action spectrum is not known, so it cannot be asserted that SPF may accurately predict the level of protection against this endpoint. We addressed this issue by measuring in human volunteers the ability of two broad‐spectrum SPF 15 sunscreens with different ultraviolet A (UVA) protection levels, to prevent the alteration of the efferent phase of the local delayed‐type hypersensitivity (DTH) response to recall antigens (Multitest Pasteur/Mérieux, Lyon, France) after acute solar‐simulated UV exposure. We first determined the ultraviolet radiation (UVR) dose needed to induce a significant DTH inhibition in several groups of 15 volunteers. Two minimal erythemal doses (2 MED) were found to be the minimal immunosuppressive dose (MISD). As a result, the immune DTH response is reduced in average by 36%. The lower doses tested (0.5 and 1 MED) were ineffective. Sunscreen‐treated groups were exposed to either 1 or 2 MED × SPF doses. As expected, no alteration in DTH response was observed in the groups exposed to 1 MED × SPF whatever the sunscreen applied. In contrast, after exposure to 2 MED × SPF, the DTH response remained unaltered in the group pretreated with the sunscreen product with the higher protection in the UVA range but was significantly suppressed by 55.7% in the group pretreated with sunscreen with a much lower protection in the UVA range. These data suggest that SPF may not be sufficient to predict the ability of sunscreens to protect from UV‐induced immune suppression. Determining the level of UVA protection is particularly needed, as UVA seems to have a relatively low contribution to erythema but is highly involved in immunosuppression.