Cited by 382Skin Protection and Agingmelanin and skin pigmentationDermatologic Treatments and Research

New insights in photoaging, UVA induced damage and skin types

Open access
Battie, Claire, Jitsukawa, Setsuko, Bernerd, Françoise, Del Bino, Sandra, Marionnet, Claire, Verschoore, Michèle·2014·Experimental Dermatology

Abstract

UVA radiation is the most prevalent component of solar UV radiation; it deeply penetrates into the skin and induces profound alterations of the dermal connective tissue. In recent years, the detrimental effects of UVA radiation were more precisely demonstrated at cellular and molecular levels, using adequate methods to identify biological targets of UVA radiation and the resulting cascade impairment of cell functions and tissue degradation. In particular gene expression studies recently revealed that UVA radiation induces modulation of several genes confirming the high sensitivity of dermal fibroblasts to UVA radiation. The major visible damaging effects of UVA radiation only appear after years of exposure: it has been clearly evidenced that they are responsible for more or less early signs of photoageing and photocarcinogenesis. UVA radiation appears to play a key role in pigmented changes occurring with age, the major sign of skin photoaging in Asians. Skin susceptibility to photoaging alterations also depends on constitutive pigmentation. The skin sensitivity to UV light has been demonstrated to be linked to skin color type.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/exd.12388

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • UVA has deeper dermal penetration than UVB and is the primary driver of photoaging.

    “UVB is predominantly absorbed by the skin's epidermis, whereas UVA has a longer wavelength and therefore deeper dermal penetration, making it the primary driver of photoaging [12].”

    From Sunscreens and Photoaging: A Review of Current Literature (2021) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Introduction identifies UVA as the longer-wavelength radiation and says it penetrates deeper than UVB. “Skin photoaging: UVA radiation plays a major role” says most UVB is absorbed near the surface and calls UVA a major factor in photoaging. It does not establish the stronger claim that UVA is the primary driver relative to UVB. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • UV radiation triggers an inflammatory reaction in light skin.

    “UV radiation triggers an inflammatory reaction in light skin [44].”

    From A Comprehensive Review of the Role of UV Radiation in Photoaging Processes Between Different Types of Skin (2025) · cites this paper as [44]

    The section “Skin color types and sensitivity to UV light” reports UV-induced DNA damage in light skin. It does not establish that this damage is an inflammatory reaction; searches for inflammatory response and erythema did not identify a passage making that link. Page information was unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Del Bino et al. introduced the Individual Typology Angle (ITA) as a sensitivity indicator in their investigation of the connection between skin pigmentation and vulnerability to UV-induced damage.

    “In their investigation of the connection between skin pigmentation and vulnerability to UV-induced damage, Del Bino et al. [44] introduced the Individual Typology Angle (ITA) as a sensitivity indicator.”

    From A Comprehensive Review of the Role of UV Radiation in Photoaging Processes Between Different Types of Skin (2025) · cites this paper as [44]

    The figure caption in the Conclusion says Del Bino et al. investigated skin color and UV-induced response in 42 skin samples and measured ITA to determine skin color type. The Skin color types section describes ITA as an existing classification, citing an earlier reference; it does not say Del Bino et al. introduced it or define it as a sensitivity indicator. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • UVA causes induction of apoptosis in dermal fibroblasts and increased MMP levels involved in collagen degradation.

    “Studies of UVA on skin models demonstrated that UVA caused the induction of apoptosis in dermal fibroblasts and increased MMP levels, which are enzymes involved in collagen degradation [12, 15].”

    From Sunscreens and Photoaging: A Review of Current Literature (2021) · cites this paper as [12]

  • The inflammatory reaction in light skin is evidenced by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha.

    “This is evidenced by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha.”

    From A Comprehensive Review of the Role of UV Radiation in Photoaging Processes Between Different Types of Skin (2025) · cites this paper as [44]

    The 'Skin color types and sensitivity to UV light' section reports greater UV-induced DNA damage in lighter skin, not an inflammatory reaction. The 'UVA radiation induces biological alterations related to photoaging—in vitro proofs' section mentions modulation of genes in a cytokine-related category, but our copy does not report release of interleukin-1 or tumor necrosis factor-alpha in light skin. Searches for those cytokines and inflammatory release found no supporting passage; the indexed passages provide no page number. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Battie, C., Jitsukawa, S., Bernerd, F., Del Bino, S., Marionnet, C., & Verschoore, M.
Affiliations
  • L'Oréal (France) (FR)
  • L'Oreal Research and Innovation Asnières France
Corresponding author
Battie, Claire
Venue
Experimental Dermatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-09-19
Volume
23
Issue
s1
Pages
7-12
ISSN
  • 0906-6705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0625
OpenAlex
W2024962882
Cited by
382
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Experimental Dermatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Skin Protection and Aging
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › melanin and skin pigmentation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatologic Treatments and Research
Keywords
photoaging, UVA, skin type, dermal fibroblasts, gene expression, photocarcinogenesis, skin pigmentation, skin color, dermal connective tissue, UV damage
MeSH terms
Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation, Humans, Japan, Models, Biological, Skin, Skin Pigmentation, Sunscreening Agents, Ultraviolet Rays, Skin Aging, Matrix Metalloproteinase 1, Asian People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review