CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22Skin Protection and AgingDermatologic Treatments and Researchmelanin and skin pigmentation

Novel Approach to the Treatment of Hyperpigmented Photodamaged Skin: 4% Hydroquinone/0.3% Retinol versus Tretinoin 0.05% Emollient Cream

Draelos, Zoe Diana·2005·Dermatologic Surgery
DOI 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2005.31723
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mild to moderately photodamaged skin is characterized by dyspigmentation, fine wrinkles, and tactile roughness. An optimal approach to the topical treatment of photoaging would simultaneously address all appearance issues. OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of 4% hydroquinone and 0.3% retinol in photoaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 16-week study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of a single cream containing prescription topical 4% hydroquinone for dyspigmentation and the cosmeceutical 0.3% retinol for fine wrinkles in an emollient vehicle for tactile roughness. This novel formulation was compared with 0.05% tretinoin emollient cream, the standard against which all other topical photoaging treatments are compared. Investigator assessments, subject assessments, and photography represented the evaluation end points. RESULTS: The cosmeceutical emollient 4% hydroquinone/0.3% retinol cream more effectively diminished the collective signs of photodamage than 0.05% tretinoin emollient cream in terms of dyspigmentation, fine wrinkles, and tactile roughness in 16 weeks. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy of hydroquinone and retinol may improve photoaging-associated hyperpigmentation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2005.31723

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Draelos et al. concluded that 0.3% retinol/4% hydroquinone treatment effect was better than 0.05% tretinoin in photodamaged skin treatment.

    “The authors concluded 0.3% retinol/4% hydroquinone treatment effect was better than 0.05% tretinoin in photodamaged skin treatment.”

    From Cosmeceuticals in photoaging: A review. (2024) · cites this paper as [59]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Draelos, Z. D.
Affiliations
Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Draelos, Zoe Diana
ORCID
Draelos, Zoe Diana
Venue
Dermatologic Surgery
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2005-07
Volume
31
Issue
s1
Pages
799-805
ISSN
1076-0512 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.1524-4725.2005.31723
OpenAlex
W2018486250
Cited by
22
References
19
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Dermatologic Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Skin Protection and Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatologic Treatments and Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › melanin and skin pigmentation
Keywords
photodamage, photoaging, hyperpigmentation, hydroquinone, retinol, all-trans retinoic acid, combination therapy, fine wrinkles, tactile roughness
MeSH terms
Administration, Topical, Adult, Dermatologic Agents, Double-Blind Method, Drug Combinations, Emollients, Female, Humans, Hydroquinones, Middle Aged, Tretinoin, Vitamin A, Skin Aging, Treatment Outcome, Hyperpigmentation

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