Niacinamide + “Linefade” ameliorate crow's feet wrinkles and facial sagging in a split‐face image analysis study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Niacinamide, the amide of Vitamin B3, has been well-documented for its ability to induce a wide range of benefits for photo-damaged skin.1 The incorporation of niacinamide into skincare products is common practice among dermatology-oriented consumer brands. Therefore, maximizing the performance of niacinamide-containing formulations has significant value for consumers who rely on daily-use products for maintaining healthy skin. An open observational and single-blinded randomized split-face study was undertaken to investigate the beneficiary effects of combing niacinamide with a previously studied PPAR-α agonist complex termed “Linefade.” Linefade significantly induces collagen IV in cell culture models and human skin explants.2 Depletion of the collagen IV dermal-epidermal anchoring protein occurs with chronological aging in non-photodamaged skin.3 The combination of niacinamide formulated with Linefade may offer a complementary approach for simultaneously targeting the intrinsic and extrinsic factors of aging skin. An image analysis study was carried out on 20 females with an average age of 43.3 years. All the volunteers were asked to apply product A cream (2% Linefade + 3% Niacinamide) and product B cream (3% Niacinamide) on either side of their face for a total of 45 days. VisioTOP-300 positioning bench + with AEVA-V3 imaging system were used to take pictures and measurements of the treated area before the application of the products and at 15-day intervals. Mean depth of roughness (Rz) and arithmetical mean of roughness (Ra) were calculated to assess the improvement in crow's feet roughness and wrinkles. The positive volume parameter was analyzed to evaluate the reduction in jawline sagging. Data obtained with each product at various experimental times were compared using Student's t-test. An inter-group analysis comparing the results of product A with product B was performed. Values of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Image topography analysis allows to quantitatively study skin roughness with scientifically validated methodologies, largely used in controlled clinical trials.4-6 When comparing products A and B to each other in an inter-group analysis, a significant difference was observed between the two products. The mean percent (%) variation of the Rz and Ra parameters between products A and B are shown in Figure 1A,B. This observation underscores the limits of niacinamide in applications which target facial skin roughness. The evaluation of the positive volume (jaw contour sagging) is simply the skin surface displacements which protrude from the reference plane.7 This image analysis technique establishes a reference plane Z min at T0. The inter-group analysis comparing the results of product A with product B yielded a significant reduction in positive volume occurring on Day 45 as shown by Figure 2. This observation underscores the limits of niacinamide in applications which target facial sagging. While limited by a panel size of N = 20, this study demonstrates how the utilization of niacinamide can be enhanced by adding the PPAR-α agonist complex Linefade into a skin cream product. In a split face analysis, Product A (niacinamide + Linefade) demonstrated significant efficacy in reducing crow's feet roughness and jaw contour sagging within the area tested after a period of 45 days, as shown by the variations in the Rz, Ra, and positive volume parameters when compared with product B (niacinamide). Linefade, when formulated in topical cream with niacinamide, was found to significantly reduce age-related changes such as crow's feet roughness/wrinkles, and jaw contour sagging in healthy females. Future investigations are ongoing in our laboratory to establish the therapeutic relevance of Linefade for dermatologic conditions, such as diabetic, psoriatic, eczematic, or blistering-skin conditions. The study was performed at Abich Inc., Montréal (Québec), Canada from the period starting April 12, 2021 till May 26, 2021. The study was funded by DS. DS intends to manufacture and market Linefade as an ingredient for topical use. CPD and SBD consulted on the research and development. The study was carried out per the ethical principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and according to the Colipa Guidelines for the evaluation of the efficacy of cosmetic products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".