High photostability sunscreen composition

Description

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the priority benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/332,265 filed on May 7, 2010, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.

STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

Not applicable.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to topical compositions that provide protection from ultraviolet radiation (“UVR”).

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The medical community, companies involved in the development and formulation of photoprotective consumer products, the popular press, and regulators have recognized the long term health consequences of exposure to ultraviolet radiation. It is well known that exposure to UVB light (290 nm-320 nm) causes erythema and sunburn. Longer term, exposure to short and long wavelength UVA rays (from about 320 nm to 400 nm) has been linked not only to photodamage—manifested as fines lines, rhtyids, lentigines, uneven pigmentation—but also actinic keratoses, impaired immune function and skin cancers.

Organic sunscreen filters prevent erythema and photodamage by absorbing a certain percentage of UVR over a specified spectrum. Sun protection factor (“SPF”) is an expression of this percentage and theoretically indicates that the user is protected X times longer than without sunscreen. An SPF 33 product would, theoretically, allow 3% of unattenuated sunlight to reach the skin. Such a product would absorb 97% of erythemal UVR, allowing the user to conclude that he or she could stay out in the sun 33 times longer than without the sunscreen without erythema.

More recently, there has been increased focus on the contribution of UVA to these adverse health effects. This increased awareness of the importance of UVA protection resulted in the introduction of broad-spectrum sunscreens (having protection across the ultraviolet radiation spectrum, from 290 nm to 400 nm) and in FDA's Proposed Amendment of Final Sunscreen Monograph published in the Federal Register in Vol. 72, No. 165 at pages 49070 to 49122.

FDA is now proposing that both in vitro and in vivo tests be conducted to determine UVA radiation protection. The proposed in vitro test is the ratio of long wavelength UVA-1 absorbance (340 nm-400 nm) to total UV absorbance (i.e., UVB+UVA). The proposed in vivo test relates to persistent pigment darkening (PPD) test, which is similar to the SPF test except the endpoint is pigment darkening rather than erythema. FDA is proposing that UVA labeling consist of a UVA rating reflecting both the in vitro and in vivo test results, with sunscreen formulations that offer the highest UVA protection receiving a maximum of four stars.

Achieving broad-spectrum protection across the ultraviolet radiation spectrum (from 290 nm to 400 nm) requires sunscreen active ingredients that absorb, block or otherwise attenuate longer UVA-1 radiation. Avobenzone, zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are three sunscreen actives currently approved by the FDA that provide protection from longer UV wavelengths. (The recently approved Mexoryl SX sunscreen is effective against shorter wavelengths, having a maximum absorption at 344 nm.)

It is well-known in the art, however, that avobenzone rapidly undergoes photochemical degradation and is, therefore, not considered to be “photostable”. Thus, the labeled SPF of a sunscreen formulation containing avobenzone is not necessarily reflective of the product's UVR protection.

Exposure to UVR dissipates the available concentration of the organic UV filters in a sunscreen formulation, resulting in a product with decreased efficacy, both in terms of level of protection and time of protection. In terms of photophysics, UVR exposure causes organic UV absorbing molecules to leave the ground state and enter the single-excited state. The excited-state filters may be returned to the ground state by singlet quenching (and thereby conserved to continue providing UVR protection), or transferred from the singlet-state to the triplet-excited state. In the triplet state, the UV filter molecule may undergo triplet quenching (and return to the ground state). If, however, triplet quenching (or another photophysical pathway) does not restore the sunscreen molecule to the ground state, the filter undergoes photodegradation by one or more photochemical reactions. Photodegraded filters lose their ability to filter UVR, thereby decreasing the effectiveness of the overall formulation.

In part recognizing the limitations of SPF, other metrics for sunscreen efficiency have been developed. Among these is photostability. In published articles and meetings of national and international Societies of Cosmetic Chemists, researchers have commented that broad-spectrum protection must remain efficient throughout the period of UVR exposure.

As used in the present application, the photostability of a UV filter can be measured and expressed in terms of the amount (i.e., concentration) by which the filter is degraded by one or more photochemical reactions, including photofragmentation, isomerization, tautomerization, photoaddition and substitution reactions, and/or cycloadditions. These photodegradation reactions also generate free radicals, which are associated with adverse health consequences.

Previous attempts to create photostable sunscreen formulations containing avobenzone are described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,235,587; 7,244,416; 6,444,195; 6,033,649; 6,071,501; 5,985,251; 5,849,273; 5,576,354; and 5,587,150. (To the extent pertinent, all published US patent application and granted US patents cited in the present application are incorporated by reference in their entirety.)

U.S. Pat. No. 5,776,439 teaches a photostable composition comprising from 1% to 10% avobenzone and from 0.5% to 10% oxybenzone, a UVB absorber. (Unless otherwise stated, percentages are weight/weight.)

Oxybenzone has a triplet excited state energy greater than 65 kcal/mol. The triplet excited state energy of avobenzone is less than 60 kcal/mol. At the September 2007 Annual Sunscreen Symposium organized by the Florida Chapter of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists, Bonda described several photophysical pathways for quenching singlet excited energy, including fluorescence. (Fluorescence is the emission of photons from the singlet excited.) Bonda reported that oxybenzone quenches avobenzone fluorescence and proposed a mechanistic explanation for the increased photostability of avobenzone in formulations containing oxybenzone. According to Bonda, oxybenzone likely reduces the flow of singlet excited state energy to the triplet-excited state, and thereby decreases the potential for photodegradative chemical reactions involving avobenzone.

Published U.S. Patent Application No. 2005/0013781 teaches a sunscreen composition comprising homosalate, octyl salicylate, oxybenzone, octocrylene and avobenzone.

There remains a need for a broad-spectrum sunscreen formulation having a high UVA rating of PFA +++ that exhibits a high degree of photostability and further comprises an effective antioxidant system to quench free radicals generated by photodegradation of sunscreen filters. This need is met by the composition of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to sunscreen compositions consisting essentially of at least one dibenzoylmethane derivative, preferably avobenzone, and at least four compounds that quench singlet-excited energy and/or triplet-excited energy, respectively “singlet quenchers” and “triplet quenchers” TQ and collectively excited energy quenchers (“EEQs”). Commercial embodiments of the photostable sunscreen of the present invention can also include further ingredients such as emollients, surfactants, and carrier fluids, with the proviso that such further ingredients do not adversely affect the photostability of the sunscreen composition as measured by the method described herein. The photostability of the sunscreen composition is adversely affected if the composition does not retain at least 85% of its initial UV absorbance over the range of 290 nm to 400 nm after being irradiated with 15 MEDs of simulated solar radiation as described hereinbelow.

In order to reduce photochemical reactions that degrade avobenzone, the compositions of the present invention contain at least four EEQs. While not wishing to be bound by a theory, the inventors believe that the inclusion of at least four EEQs within the indicated concentration ranges allows the triplet-excited state energy of avobenzone to be quenched faster than photodegradative chemical reactions can take place in the absence of all four EEQs required by the present invention.

The at least one dibenzoylmethane derivative is selected from the group consisting of:

(a) 2-methyldibenzoylmethane;

(b) 4-methyldibenzoylmethane;

(c) 4-isopropyldibenzoylmethane;

(d) 4-tert-butyldibenzoylmethane;

(e) 2,4-dimethyldibenzoylmethane;

(f) 2,5-dimethyldibenzoylmethane;

(g) 4-tert-butyl-4′-methoxy-dibenzoylmethane;

(h) 4,4′-diisopropyldibenzoylmethane;

(i) 2-methyl-5-isopropyl-4′-methoxydibenzoylmethane;

(j) 2-methyl-5-tert-butyl-4′-methoxydibenzoylmethane;

(k) 2,4-dimethyl-4′-methoxydibenzoylmethane; and

(l) 2,6-dimethyl-4-tert-butyl-4′-methoxydibenzoylmethane

In a particularly preferred embodiment of this aspect of the present invention, the at least one dibenzoylmethane derivative is avobenzone, 4-tert-butyl-4′-methoxy dibenzoylmethane. Avobenzone, the USAN name for butylmethoxydibenzoylmethane, is sold under various tradenames, including Parsol® 1789 from DSM.

A dibenzoylmethane derivative is preferably included in the photostable sunscreen compositions of the present invention at concentrations of from about 2.7% to about 3.3%.

The at least four EEQs required in the present invention include octocrylene, oxybenzone, polysilicone-15, and at least one microalgal extract, preferably Haematococcus pluvialis.

Oxybenzone, also known as benzophenone-3, is sold under various tradenames including Uvinul® M-40 from BASF and is preferably included in the photostable sunscreen compositions of the present invention at concentrations of from about 5.4% to about 6.6%.

Octocrylene, 2-cyano-3,3-diphenylacrylic acid, is commercially-available from a number of raw material suppliers including Parsol® 340 from DSM. In the photostable sunscreen compositions of the present invention, octocrylene is preferably present at concentrations of from about 2.5% to about 3.1%.

Polysilicone-15 [α-(trimethylsilyl)-w-(trimethylsilyloxy)poly[oxy(dimethyl) silylene]-co-[oxy(methyl)(2-{4-[2,2-bis(ethoxycarbonyl)vinyl]phenoxy}-1-methyleneethyl) silylene]-co-[oxy(methyl)(2-(4-[2,2-bis(ethoxycarbonyl)vinyl]phenoxy)prop-1-enyl)silylene]] is commercially available tradename Parsol® SLX from DSM. In the photostable sunscreen compositions of the present invention, Polysilicone-15 is present at concentrations of from about 0.1% to about 1.0%. Preferably, the photostable sunscreen composition of the present invention contains Polysilicone-15 in a ratio to avobenzone of about 1:3.

One of the required at least four EEQ ingredients is a microalgal extract, preferably an extract of Haematococcus pluvialis, which is preferably present at a concentration of from 0.001% to 0.5%. An extract of H. pluvialis can be oil-soluble. Such an oil-soluble extract is commercially available from Biosil Technologies under the tradename Astaplancton® G8 (INCI Name: sunflower seed oil (and) Haematococcus pluvialis extract). A suitable extract of H. pluvialis can also be water-soluble. Such a water-soluble extract is commercially available from Biosil Technologies under the tradename Astaplancton® (INCI Name: water (and) Haematococcus pluvialis extract (and) sea water).

In a preferred embodiment, the photostable sunscreen composition of the invention further includes at least one ester, preferably two esters, of salicylic acid that absorb(s) UVR and selected from the group of octisalate, homosalate, as well as octyl, amyl, phenyl, benzyl, glyceryl, and dipropyleneglycol salycilate esters. The at least one salicylate ester is present in the photostable compositions of the present invention at concentrations of from about 4.5% to about 16.5%.

In a particularly preferred embodiment, the at least one ester of salicylic acid that absorbs UVR is selected from the group of homosalate and octisalate.

In an even more preferred embodiment, the photostable composition of the invention contains two salicylate esters, preferably homosalate and octisalate, at a combined concentration of from about 13.5% to about 16.5%.

In addition to a dibenzoylmethane derivative and the optional but preferred two salicylate esters, the photostable sunscreens of the present invention may include one or more additional UVR-absorbing organic filters. As will be appreciated by those of skill in the art, different filters are approved by different regulatory agencies. Among the additional organic sunscreen filters suitable for use in the composition of the present invention are those disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,235,587 and 6,444,195 and US Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0140997. The '587 patent refers to sunscreen filters as “photoactive” compounds. For purposes of the present application “photoactive compounds” are to be understood to be synonymous with sunscreen filters.

The photostable sunscreens of the present invention may also contain one or more of the following: Bis-Ethylhexyloxyphenol Methoxyphenyl Triazine (tradename Tinosorb® S from CIBA Specialty Chemicals, High Point, N.C.); Methylene Bis-Benzotriazolyl Tetramethylbutylphenol (tradename Tinosorb® M from CIBA Specialty Chemicals); Butyloctyl Salicylate (tradename HallBrite® BHB from The HallStar Company, Bedford Park, Ill.); Hexadecyl Benzoate; Terephthalylidene Dicamphor Sulfonic Acid (tradename Mexoryl® SX); Diethylhexyl 2,6-Naphthalate (tradename Corapan®TQ from Symrise Inc., Teterboro, N.J.); Diethylhexyl Syringylidene Malonate (tradename Oxynex® ST from EMD Chemicals Inc. Hawthorne, N.Y.); Polyester-8 (tradename Polycrylene® from The HallStar Company); (j) Dimethyl Capramide (tradename SpectraSoly® DMDA from The HallStar Company); and 4-Methylbenzylidene camphor.

The following formulation is illustrative of the photostable sunscreen composition of the present invention and was prepared using techniques and equipment known to those having ordinary skill in the art of formulating personal care products.

Example

Formulation #1 (Photostable Sunscreen of Present Invention)

INCI Name	Weight %	Weight % (Range)

Octisalate	5.00%	4.50-5.50%
Homosalate	10.0%	9.00-11.00%
Avobenzone	3.0%	2.70-3.30%
Octocrylene	2.79%	2.511-3.069%
Oxybenzone	6.0%	5.40-6.60%
Haemalococcus pluvialis Extract	0.10%	0.001-0.50%
Polysilicone-15	0.90%	0.10-1.00%
C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate	8.00%	3.00-10.00%
Tribehenin PEG-20 Esters	0.60%	0.20-2.00%
Cyclopentasiloxane	5.00%	2.00-10.00%
Helianthus Annus (Sunflower) Seed Oil	0.50%	0.10-1.50%
Carbomer	0.50%	0.10-1.00%
Silica	4.00%	1.00-8.00%
Cetearyl Alcohol	1.40%	1.00-3.00%
Glyceryl Stearate (and) PEG-100	0.80%	0.20-2.00%
Stearate
Potassium Cetyl Phosphate	0.80%	0.50-2.00%
Propanediol	2.00%	1.00-4.00%
Aminomethyl Propanol	0.40%	0.10-1.00%
Retinyl Palmitate (and) Zea Mays	0.10%	0.01-0.50%
(Corn) Oil (and) Cholecalciferol
Sodium Phytate	0.10%	.01-0.20%
Phenoxyethanol (and) Caprylyl	1.00%	0.50-1.30%
Glycol (and) Chlorphenesin
Water (Aqua)	QS	QS

Example

Photostability Test #1

Formulation #1 was subjected to photostability testing in three separate studies, described in detail below, to determine the retention of UV protection as a function of time when the formulation is exposed to simulated sunlight. A sunscreen standard, COLIPA P2 SPF 15, was used as a control reference in one or more of the tests. The P2 standard contains Padimate 0 (7%) and Oxybenzone (3%).

Photostability was determined using an Optometrics LLC Model SPF 290S UV analyzer system. Photostability was judge by the retention of absorbance of UVA radiation, UVB radiation, or both (full spectrum analysis) after exposing the sample to 15 MED (minimal erythema) dose; 1 MED≈20 mJ/cm²).

Samples of the photostable sunscreen composition of the present invention were applied to PMMA (poly(methymethacrylate)) plates (supplied by Schongerg, Hamburg, Germany) as a film at a concentration of 2 mg/cm². In a first study, the samples of the composition of the present invention were irradiated with simulated natural sunlight to 15 MEDs as emitted by a Solar Light Model ISS Xenon Arc Solar Simulator equipped with Solar Light Dose Control System and UVB detector. (The Solar Simulator was calibrated to meet the common international SPF methodology jointly promulgated by the European Cosmetics Association (“COLIPA”), the Japan Cosmetic Industry Association, the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association of South Africa, published on May 2006, referred to herein as the “COLIPA standard.”) The dose control and detector systems were also calibrated. The amount of energy transmitted through the composition of the present invention was recorded initially and then at intervals until 15 MEDs had been administered. The SPF at each interval was calculated by dividing the amount of energy transmitted through a blank film by the amount transmitted through the product-coated film.

A photolabile sunscreen formula containing 6 wt-% octinoxate and 3 wt % avobenzone was used as a “control” sample in the first study.

In the first phase of the first study, the samples were irradiated with the amount of energy transmitted through the product film recorded initially (i.e., at time=0) and then periodically during irradiation with simulated natural sunlight to 15 MEDs produced by a Solar Light Model 15S Xenon Arc Solar Simulator equipped with a Solar Light Dose Control system including a UVB detector. The second phase of the first study was similar to the first phase except a Solar Light Model 601 Multiport Xenon Arc Solar Simulator was used for irradiation. The Solar Simulator was filtered to provide a UVA spectra meeting the Persistent Pigment Darkening specifications promulgated by the Japan Cosmetic Industry Association (JCIA). See, Japan Cosmetic Industry Association Measurement Standard for UVA Protection Efficacy (1995) at www.jcia.org. The energy transmitted in mw/cm² was recorded initially and periodically up to an amount of energy equal to about 600 mw/cm², or approximately 4 theoretical PPDs.

The results of the first photostability study were as follows.

Tables 1.1-1.2 show the SPF values and associated percent erythemal energy transmittance through the photostable sunscreen composition of the present invention and the COLIPA P2 SPF 15 Standard.

TABLE 1.1
Formulation #1

							Average	Average	Percent
	Trial 1	Trial 2	Trial 3	Trial 4	Trial 5	Trial 6	MED/hr	SPF	Transmittance

Initial	0.5	0.4	0.5	0.8	0.6	0.7	0.58	150.86	0.66
30	0.5	0.4	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.53	165.00	0.61
60	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.52	170.32	0.59
90	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.52	170.32	0.59
120	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.50	176.00	0.57
150	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.50	176.00	0.57
180	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.52	170.32	0.59
210	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.52	170.32	0.59
240	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.52	170.32	0.59
270	0.5	0.4	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.53	165.00	0.61
300	0.5	0.4	0.5	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.53	165.00	0.61

TABLE 1.2
COLIPA P2 SPF 15 Standard

							Average	Average	Percent
	Trial 1	Trial 2	Trial 3	Trial 4	Trial 5	Trial 6	MED/hr	SPF	Transmittance

Initial	1.2	0.6	1.1	0.4	0.3	0.4	0.67	132.00	0.76
30	2.3	2.2	3.8	1	0.8	3.3	2.23	39.40	2.54
60	5.1	5	6.2	3	2.1	5.1	4.42	19.92	5.02
90	7.9	7.8	11.5	4.9	4.4	8.4	7.48	11.76	8.50
120	10.4	10.3	14.5	7	6.3	11.5	10.00	8.80	11.36
150	12.6	12.5	16.9	9	9	11.8	11.97	7.35	13.60
180	15	14.6	19.2	11	10.2	14.3	14.05	6.26	15.97
210	15.8	16.4	21.2	12.7	12.2	16.3	15.77	5.58	17.92
240	18	18.3	23.2	14.4	13.8	18.1	17.63	4.99	20.04
270	20.1	20.2	24.8	15.9	12.8	21.1	19.15	4.60	21.76
300	22.2	21.7	26.6	17.5	16.6	22.9	21.25	4.14	24.15

Table 1.3 shows the persistent pigment darkening (PPD) values and associated transmittance values during irradiation with a “UVA” PPD test type spectra in accordance with JCIA standard.

TABLE 1.3
PPD of Formulation #1

								Esti-
	Trial	Trial	Trial	Trial	Trial	Trial		mated
Mins	1	2	3	4	5	6	Avg	PPD

0	0.77	0.94	0.85	0.9	0.86	1.01	0.88	56.7
3	0.97	1.23	0.82	0.88	0.91	1.1	0.99	50.8
6	1.02	1.24	0.93	1	1	1.18	1.06	47.1
9	1.06	1.36	0.9	0.79	1.06	1.19	1.06	47.2
12	1.1	1.19	1.15	0.91	1.03	1.32	1.12	44.8
15	1.15	1.26	1.19	1.11	1.11	1.38	1.2	41.7
18	1.35	1.46	1.09	1.02	1.12	1.35	1.23	40.6
21	1.43	1.24	1.21	1.2	1.15	1.35	1.26	39.6

In the above tests, it should be noted that to twenty-one minutes of UVA energy, at an applied dose of 100 mw/cm², used to irradiate the samples is equivalent to about 8.4 theoretical PPDs.

Example 2

Photostability Study

A second photostability study was performed in the same manner as the first study except as follows. A Solar Light Model 601 Multiport Xenon Arc Solar Simulator was filtered to provide a UVA spectra meeting the Persistent Pigment Darkening (PPD) specifications used by the Japanese Cosmetic Industry Association. The administered dose was equal to about 600 mw/cm², which is equivalent to approximately 4 theoretical PPD units.

COLIPA sunscreen standard P2 SPF 15 (“P2”) was used as the control reference in the second study. The results of the second study are given below

Sample Identification for Second Photostability Study

Sample #	Description

1.	Formulation #1	Initial and Irradiated
2	Formulation #1	Initial and Irradiated
3.	Formulation #1	Initial and Irradiated
4.	Formulation #1	Initial and Dark Control
5.	Formulation #1	Initial and Dark Control
6.	Formulation #1	Initial and Dark Control
7.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Irradiated
8.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Irradiated
9.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Irradiated
10.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Dark Control
11.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Dark Control
12.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Dark Control
13.	Formulation #1	Initial and Dark Heated Control
14.	Formulation #1	Initial and Dark Heated Control
15.	Formulation #1	Initial and Dark Heated Control
16.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Dark Heated Control
17.	COLIPA P2 Std	Initial and Dark Heated Control

The initial and post-irradiation % absorbance for Samples 1-3 are shown in Tables 2.1-2.3.

TABLE 2.1
Sample 1

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	290	1.919	1.735	90.4
	295	1.897	1.708	90.0
	300	1.84	1.67	90.8
	305	1.833	1.66	90.6
	310	1.846	1.659	89.9
	315	1.867	1.68	90.0
	320	1.873	1.677	89.5
	325	1.832	1.645	89.8
	330	1.791	1.601	89.4
	335	1.758	1.58	89.9
	340	1.744	1.563	89.6
	345	1.713	1.53	89.3
	350	1.671	1.498	89.6
	355	1.636	1.459	89.2
	360	1.586	1.413	89.1
	365	1.515	1.347	88.9
	370	1.405	1.25	89.0
	375	1.296	1.154	89.0
	380	1.204	1.068	88.7
	385	0.999	0.881	88.2
	390	0.615	0.542	88.1
	395	0.273	0.243	89.0
	400	0.116	0.107	92.2

TABLE 2.2
Sample 2

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	290	1.956	1.699	86.9
	295	1.933	1.689	87.4
	300	1.877	1.643	87.5
	305	1.861	1.628	87.5
	310	1.883	1.641	87.1
	315	1.902	1.645	86.5
	320	1.912	1.643	85.9
	325	1.871	1.611	86.1
	330	1.815	1.581	87.1
	335	1.788	1.56	87.2
	340	1.769	1.54	87.1
	345	1.751	1.511	86.3
	350	1.701	1.473	86.6
	355	1.665	1.442	86.6
	360	1.616	1.396	86.4
	365	1.544	1.334	86.4
	370	1.434	1.239	86.4
	375	1.327	1.148	86.5
	380	1.233	1.066	86.5
	385	1.026	0.888	86.5
	390	0.637	0.56	87.9
	395	0.289	0.26	90.0
	400	0.125	0.122	97.6

TABLE 2.3
Sample 3

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	290	2.212	1.872	84.6
	295	2.105	1.849	87.8
	300	2.062	1.798	87.2
	305	2.035	1.792	88.1
	310	2.049	1.786	87.2
	315	2.096	1.816	86.6
	320	2.113	1.813	85.8
	325	2.08	1.782	85.7
	330	2.029	1.756	86.5
	335	2.006	1.722	85.8
	340	1.98	1.711	86.4
	345	1.947	1.677	86.1
	350	1.906	1.642	86.1
	355	1.868	1.6	85.7
	360	1.815	1.554	85.6
	365	1.736	1.486	85.6
	370	1.615	1.386	85.8
	375	1.497	1.29	86.2
	380	1.394	1.198	85.9
	385	1.162	1.002	86.2
	390	0.72	0.628	87.2
	395	0.321	0.286	89.1
	400	0.136	0.126	92.6

The initial and post-irradiation % absorbance for the P2 standard are shown in Tables 2.4-2.6.

TABLE 2.4
Sample 7

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	290	1.606	1.467	91.3
	295	1.628	1.465	90.0
	300	1.635	1.441	88.1
	305	1.632	1.437	88.1
	310	1.635	1.429	87.4
	315	1.617	1.394	86.2
	320	1.508	1.284	85.1
	325	1.317	1.118	84.9
	330	1.113	0.963	86.5
	335	0.95	0.842	88.6
	340	0.833	0.749	89.9
	345	0.731	0.656	89.7
	350	0.623	0.558	89.6
	355	0.521	0.456	87.5
	360	0.413	0.35	84.7
	365	0.316	0.257	81.3
	370	0.238	0.183	76.9
	375	0.177	0.125	70.6
	380	0.137	0.089	65.0
	385	0.108	0.063	58.3
	390	0.091	0.051	56.0
	395	0.079	0.039	49.4
	400	0.073	0.034	46.6

TABLE 2.5
Sample 8

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	290	1.564	1.422	90.9
	295	1.593	1.42	89.1
	300	1.578	1.393	88.3
	305	1.6	1.391	86.9
	310	1.601	1.383	86.4
	315	1.577	1.341	85.0
	320	1.466	1.233	84.1
	325	1.279	1.072	83.8
	330	1.081	0.919	85.0
	335	0.92	0.8	87.0
	340	0.806	0.71	88.1
	345	0.702	0.621	88.5
	350	0.6	0.529	88.2
	355	0.5	0.433	86.6
	360	0.395	0.335	84.8
	365	0.304	0.248	81.6
	370	0.231	0.18	77.9
	375	0.173	0.128	74.0
	380	0.136	0.094	69.1
	385	0.11	0.07	63.6
	390	0.097	0.058	59.8
	395	0.084	0.048	57.1
	400	0.079	0.042	53.2

TABLE 2.6
Sample 9

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	290	1.697	1.59	93.7
	295	1.727	1.592	92.2
	300	1.716	1.555	90.6
	305	1.725	1.538	89.2
	310	1.717	1.552	90.4
	315	1.712	1.507	88.0
	320	1.597	1.398	87.5
	325	1.414	1.226	86.7
	330	1.197	1.054	88.1
	335	1.025	0.919	89.7
	340	0.9	0.817	90.8
	345	0.785	0.715	91.1
	350	0.672	0.608	90.5
	355	0.555	0.494	89.0
	360	0.434	0.378	87.1
	365	0.325	0.274	84.3
	370	0.239	0.194	81.2
	375	0.171	0.13	76.0
	380	0.128	0.089	69.5
	385	0.096	0.063	65.6
	390	0.08	0.049	61.3
	395	0.066	0.037	56.1
	400	0.06	0.032	53.3

Tables 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9 indicate the difference between the initial experimental values and the change in absorbance after storage for about 45 minutes in a dark oven heated to about 100° F. As used herein “dark sample” means is a one that is stored in the dark for approximately the same time as identical samples were irradiated.

TABLE 2.7
Sample 13 (Average of 4 Scans)

	Wavelength	Initial	Dark/Heat	% Retained

	290	1.822	1.788	98.13
	295	1.796	1.771	98.61
	300	1.762	1.717	97.45
	305	1.753	1.714	97.78
	310	1.762	1.715	97.33
	315	1.782	1.737	97.47
	320	1.778	1.739	97.81
	325	1.74	1.701	97.76
	330	1.693	1.66	98.05
	335	1.658	1.618	97.59
	340	1.64	1.607	97.99
	345	1.615	1.583	98.02
	350	1.58	1.541	97.53
	355	1.544	1.501	97.22
	360	1.498	1.461	97.53
	365	1.431	1.386	96.86
	370	1.326	1.283	96.76
	375	1.227	1.186	96.66
	380	1.136	1.097	96.57
	385	0.942	0.903	95.86
	390	0.584	0.549	94.01
	395	0.269	0.245	91.08
	400	0.123	0.109	88.62

TABLE 2.8
Sample 14 (Average of 4 Scans)

	Wavelength	Initial	Dark/Heat	% Retained

	290	1.85	1.78	96.22
	295	1.807	1.796	99.39
	300	1.778	1.757	98.82
	305	1.774	1.74	98.08
	310	1.791	1.75	97.71
	315	1.795	1.766	98.38
	320	1.798	1.755	97.61
	325	1.756	1.739	99.03
	330	1.717	1.683	98.02
	335	1.689	1.653	97.87
	340	1.665	1.643	98.68
	345	1.634	1.61	98.53
	350	1.604	1.571	97.94
	355	1.566	1.535	98.02
	360	1.519	1.49	98.09
	365	1.453	1.419	97.66
	370	1.347	1.315	97.62
	375	1.246	1.217	97.67
	380	1.156	1.125	97.32
	385	0.957	0.925	96.66
	390	0.594	0.568	95.62
	395	0.276	0.257	93.12
	400	0.126	0.116	92.06

TABLE 2.9
Sample 15 (Average of 4 Scans)

	Wavelength	Initial	Dark/Heat	% Retained

	290	2.038	2.006	98.43
	295	2.032	1.949	95.92
	300	1.955	1.9	97.19
	305	1.959	1.882	96.07
	310	1.967	1.895	96.34
	315	1.992	1.922	96.49
	320	1.999	1.929	96.50
	325	1.972	1.889	95.79
	330	1.913	1.85	96.71
	335	1.891	1.81	95.72
	340	1.87	1.797	96.10
	345	1.843	1.768	95.93
	350	1.801	1.724	95.72
	355	1.759	1.685	95.79
	360	1.705	1.634	95.84
	365	1.629	1.561	95.83
	370	1.513	1.45	95.84
	375	1.401	1.34	95.65
	380	1.298	1.245	95.92
	385	1.074	1.028	95.72
	390	0.663	0.63	95.02
	395	0.3	0.282	94.00
	400	0.133	0.124	93.23

Tables 2.10, 2.11, and 2.12 show the initial and values after storage at approximately 100° F. for 45 minutes.

TABLE 2.10
Sample 16

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	295	1.518	1.436	94.6
	300	1.512	1.437	95.0
	305	1.524	1.447	94.9
	310	1.519	1.442	94.9
	315	1.485	1.409	94.9
	320	1.364	1.292	94.7
	325	1.174	1.117	95.1
	330	0.982	0.937	95.4
	335	0.834	0.8	95.9
	340	0.727	0.702	96.6
	345	0.632	0.612	96.8
	350	0.539	0.52	96.5
	355	0.444	0.43	96.8
	360	0.347	0.334	96.3
	365	0.263	0.25	95.1
	370	0.194	0.184	94.8
	375	0.139	0.131	94.2
	380	0.103	0.095	92.2
	385	0.081	0.071	87.7
	390	0.065	0.058	89.2
	395	0.053	0.046	86.8
	400	0.048	0.043	89.6

TABLE 2.11
Sample 17 (P2 Standard; Dark/Heated)

	290	1.568	1.476	94.1
	295	1.591	1.5	94.3
	300	1.587	1.501	94.6
	305	1.598	1.506	94.2
	310	1.6	1.502	93.9
	315	1.573	1.469	93.4
	320	1.448	1.354	93.5
	325	1.248	1.166	93.4
	330	1.043	0.979	93.9
	335	0.881	0.831	94.3
	340	0.765	0.725	94.8
	345	0.663	0.631	95.2
	350	0.561	0.533	95.0
	355	0.461	0.436	94.6
	360	0.358	0.337	94.1
	365	0.268	0.25	93.3
	370	0.197	0.182	92.4
	375	0.143	0.127	88.8
	380	0.105	0.092	87.6
	385	0.081	0.068	84.0
	390	0.067	0.055	82.1
	395	0.055	0.041	74.5
	400	0.049	0.04	81.6

TABLE 2.12
Sample 18 (P2 Standard; Dark/Heated)

			After
	Wavelength	Initial	Irradiation	% Retained

	295	1.601	1.573	98.3
	300	1.595	1.565	98.1
	305	1.6	1.579	98.7
	310	1.606	1.576	98.1
	315	1.566	1.546	98.7
	320	1.456	1.423	97.7
	325	1.259	1.229	97.6
	330	1.057	1.034	97.8
	335	0.898	0.883	98.3
	340	0.783	0.771	98.5
	345	0.683	0.674	98.7
	350	0.581	0.569	97.9
	355	0.477	0.465	97.5
	360	0.371	0.36	97.0
	365	0.277	0.264	95.3
	370	0.2	0.191	95.5
	375	0.141	0.132	93.6
	380	0.101	0.093	92.1
	385	0.074	0.068	91.9
	390	0.06	0.054	90.0
	395	0.047	0.042	89.4
	400	0.042	0.039	92.9

Table 2.13 below shows the initial and post-irradiation absorbance of the control samples.

Dark Heated Control Correction Factor

	Sample 13	Sample %	Sample 15	Average
Wavelength	% Retained	Retained 14	% Retained	% Retained

290	98.13	96.22	98.43	97.59
295	98.61	99.39	95.92	97.97
300	97.45	98.82	97.19	97.82
305	97.78	98.08	96.07	97.31
310	97.33	97.71	96.34	97.13
315	97.47	98.38	96.49	97.45
320	97.81	97.61	96.50	97.30
325	97.76	99.03	95.79	97.53
330	98.05	98.02	96.71	97.59
335	97.59	97.87	95.72	97.06
340	97.99	98.68	96.10	97.59
345	98.02	98.53	95.93	97.49
350	97.53	97.94	95.72	97.07
355	97.22	98.02	95.79	97.01
360	97.53	98.09	95.84	97.15
365	96.86	97.66	95.83	96.78
370	96.76	97.62	95.84	96.74
375	96.66	97.67	95.65	96.66
380	96.57	97.32	95.92	96.60
385	95.86	96.66	95.72	96.08
390	94.01	95.62	95.02	94.88
395	91.08	93.12	94.00	92.73
400	88.62	92.06	93.23	91.30

Table 2.14 shows the P2 standard corrected absorbance after irradiation.

TABLE 2.14
Experimental Average Absorbance Retained

		Average %	% Correction	Correct
	Wavelength	Retained	Factor	Absorbance

	290	87.3	97.59	89.45
	295	88.4	97.97	90.25
	300	88.5	97.82	90.47
	305	88.7	97.31	91.15
	310	88.1	97.13	90.67
	315	87.7	97.45	90.00
	320	87.1	97.30	89.50
	325	87.2	97.53	89.40
	330	87.7	97.59	89.84
	335	87.7	97.06	90.31
	340	87.7	97.59	89.86
	345	87.2	97.49	89.49
	350	87.5	97.07	90.11
	355	87.1	97.01	89.83
	360	87.0	97.15	89.58
	365	87.0	96.78	89.86
	370	87.1	96.74	90.00
	375	87.2	96.66	90.26
	380	87.0	96.60	90.10
	385	87.0	96.08	90.54
	390	87.8	94.88	92.49
	395	89.4	92.73	96.36
	400	94.2	91.30	103.13

Table 2.15 shows the P2 standard corrected absorbance after irradiation.

TABLE 2.15
Sample Absorbance After Dark Sample Corrections

		Average %	% Correction	Correct
	Wavelength	Retained	Factor	Absorbance

	290	92.0	95.9	95.95
	295	90.4	95.7	94.49
	300	89.0	95.9	92.80
	305	88.0	96.0	91.76
	310	88.1	95.6	92.07
	315	86.4	95.7	90.34
	320	85.6	95.3	89.80
	325	85.1	95.4	89.24
	330	86.5	95.7	90.42
	335	88.4	96.2	91.92
	340	89.6	96.6	92.75
	345	89.8	96.9	92.64
	350	89.4	96.5	92.67
	355	87.7	96.3	91.08
	360	85.6	95.8	89.29
	365	82.4	94.5	87.16
	370	78.7	94.2	83.47
	375	73.5	92.2	79.75
	380	67.9	90.6	74.88
	385	62.5	87.8	71.19
	390	59.0	87.1	67.77
	395	54.2	83.6	64.85
	400	51.0	88.0	57.97

Table 2.16 shows the Critical Wavelength (CW) and Boots star rating of the photostable sunscreen composition of the present invention both before and after irradiation.

TABLE 2.16
Critical Wavelength and Boots Star Rating

Critical Wavelength

Boots Star Rating

		Initial	Post-Irradiation	Initial	Post-Irradiation
	Sample 1	378.5	378.5	3	3
	Sample 2	378.6	378.6	3	3
	Sample 3	378.7	378.7	3	3

Example 3

Photostability Study

A third study was conducted to evaluate the photostability of Formulation #1 using the equipment and methods of the second study. The results of the third study are given below.

Sample Identification for Third Photostability Study

Sample	Code	Description
10-021-1 and -1B	Formulation #1	1 Initial and 1B
10-021-2 and -2B	Formulation #1	2 Initial and 2B Irradiated
10-021-3 & -3B	Formulation #1	3 Initial and 3B Irradiated
10-021-4 & -4B	Formulation #1	4 Initial and 4B Stored in Dark
10-021-5 and -5B	Formulation #1	5 Initial and 5B Stored in Dark
10-021-6 and -6B	Formulation #1	6 Initial and 6B Stored in Dark

TABLE 3.1
Initial and Post-Irradiation Absorbance Formulation #1 (Invention)

Wavelength (nm)	10-021-1	10-021-2	10-021-3	10-021-1B	10-021-2B	10-021-3B

290	1.738	1.899	1.994	1.571	1.639	1.805
295	1.723	1.864	1.957	1.529	1.611	1.783
300	1.678	1.823	1.913	1.502	1.578	1.726
305	1.669	1.804	1.887	1.484	1.552	1.704
310	1.679	1.821	1.915	1.473	1.558	1.71
315	1.7	1.847	1.938	1.501	1.576	1.737
320	1.69	1.844	1.951	1.504	1.579	1.734
325	1.657	1.821	1.899	1.467	1.559	1.703
330	1.611	1.764	1.856	1.45	1.531	1.687
335	1.587	1.733	1.824	1.434	1.512	1.664
340	1.561	1.71	1.8	1.402	1.493	1.635
345	1.542	1.697	1.785	1.383	1.473	1.615
350	1.504	1.659	1.742	1.352	1.438	1.572
355	1.465	1.615	1.693	1.309	1.399	1.532
360	1.423	1.571	1.641	1.267	1.357	1.483
365	1.359	1.501	1.567	1.208	1.295	1.412
370	1.26	1.395	1.45	1.118	1.208	1.31
375	1.166	1.294	1.341	1.035	1.121	1.211
380	1.076	1.201	1.237	0.954	1.037	1.116
385	0.893	1.005	1.025	0.79	0.872	0.925
390	0.547	0.623	0.624	0.488	0.552	0.567
395	0.248	0.285	0.281	0.23	0.263	0.259
400	0.108	0.126	0.123	0.11	0.13	0.123

Tables 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 indicate absorbance of initial and dark samples of Formulation #1 and comparative Commercial Formulation #s 3 and 4.

TABLE 3.4
Initial and Dark Absorbance Formulation #1 (Invention)

Wavelength (nm)	10-021-4	10-021-5	10-021-6	10-021-4B	10-021-5B	10-021-6B

290	1.894	1.794	1.867	1.846	1.765	1.853
295	1.853	1.778	1.851	1.815	1.754	1.834
300	1.817	1.741	1.821	1.784	1.719	1.789
305	1.799	1.734	1.818	1.763	1.703	1.771
310	1.821	1.736	1.801	1.787	1.714	1.789
315	1.84	1.751	1.834	1.795	1.737	1.817
320	1.842	1.756	1.838	1.797	1.734	1.805
325	1.809	1.715	1.8	1.755	1.691	1.767
330	1.752	1.676	1.76	1.727	1.655	1.73
335	1.73	1.656	1.738	1.694	1.631	1.702
340	1.707	1.638	1.717	1.672	1.603	1.675
345	1.687	1.616	1.694	1.646	1.597	1.657
350	1.644	1.576	1.658	1.611	1.554	1.623
355	1.602	1.538	1.615	1.565	1.511	1.58
360	1.56	1.495	1.569	1.525	1.47	1.536
365	1.49	1.429	1.499	1.455	1.405	1.47
370	1.385	1.33	1.392	1.35	1.308	1.365
375	1.283	1.233	1.294	1.252	1.212	1.266
380	1.19	1.143	1.201	1.157	1.123	1.173
385	0.995	0.956	1.002	0.96	0.934	0.977
390	0.621	0.598	0.625	0.593	0.582	0.603
395	0.289	0.283	0.291	0.274	0.276	0.28
400	0.135	0.134	0.137	0.128	0.133	0.134

Table 3.7 indicates the change in absorbance (i.e., % absorbance retained) for samples stored in the dark for approximately the same amount of time as irradiation (Tables 3.1-3.3).

	Wavelength (nm)	Formulation #1

	290	98.4
	295	98.6
	300	98.4
	305	97.9
	310	98.7
	315	98.6
	320	98.2
	325	97.9
	330	98.5
	335	98.1
	340	97.8
	345	98.1
	350	98.2
	355	97.9
	360	98.0
	365	98.0
	370	98.0
	375	97.9
	380	97.7
	385	97.2
	390	96.4
	395	96.2
	400	97.3

Table 3.8 (below) shows the average percent absorption retained after irradiation and after corrections based on the dark stored samples.

		Corrected %
	Wavelength (nm)	Formulation #1

	290	90.5
	295	90.1
	300	90.2
	305	90.4
	310	88.7
	315	89.0
	320	89.5
	325	89.8
	330	90.6
	335	91.3
	340	91.4
	345	90.8
	350	90.6
	355	90.7
	360	90.4
	365	90.2
	370	90.4
	375	90.5
	380	90.5
	385	91.0
	390	92.9
	395	96.1
	400	104.5

Table 3.9 (below) SPF, UVA/UVB ratio, and Critical wavelength prior to and after irradiation with a solar simulator*

				UVA/UVB
		SPF Post	UVA/UVB	ratio - Post		CW Post
Sample #	SPF Initial	Irradiation	Ratio-Initial	Irradiation	CW Initial	Irradiation

10-021-1	39.9	26.74	.73	.735	378.5	378.5
10-021-2	52.48	31.5	.744	.75	378.6	378.7
10-021-3	61.83	42.58	.739	.741	378.5	378.5
10-021-19	53.3	40.37	.694	.693	378.6	378.5
10-021-20	66.83	47.98	.699	.702	378.5	378.5
10-021-21	76.05	57.63	.703	.703	378.6	378.6
10-021-25	65.86	48.01	.694	.685	377.9	378.1
10-021-26	54.26	38.22	.693	.681	377.9	378.1
10-021-27	80.15	60.04	.705	.689	378	378.2
CW = Critical wavelength
*Values not corrected (i.e., based on dark sample).