Cited by 39Collagen: Extraction and CharacterizationSkin Protection and AgingHydrogels: synthesis, properties, applications

Gelatin-based microspheres crosslinked with glutaraldehyde and rutin oriented to cosmetics

Open access
Graziola, Fabiana, Candido, Thalita Marcílio, Oliveira, Camila Areias de, Peres, Daniela D'Almeida, Issa, Michele Georges, Mota, Joana, Rosado, Catarina, Consiglieri, Vladi Olga +3 more·2016·Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Abstract

Glutaraldehyde (GTA) has been extensively used as a gelatin crosslinking agent, however, new natural ones have been suggested as more biocompatible. Polyphenols are possible candidates and the flavonols, such as rutin (RUT), also exhibit potential synergism with sunscreens and antioxidant agents used in cosmetics. In this work, gelatin microspheres (M0) were obtained and crosslinked with GTA 10 mM (MG) or RUT 10 mM (MR), dissolved in acetone:NaOH 0,01M (70:30 v/v). MG exhibited crosslinking extent of 54.4%. Gelatin, M0, MG and MR did not elicit any signs of skin damage, regarding the formation of erythema, the barrier function disruption and negative interference in the stratum corneum hydration. Oily dispersions containing M0, MG or MR, isolated or combined with benzophenone-3 or octyl methoxycinnamate, suggested that the microspheres, at a 5.0% w/w, had no additional chemical or physical photoprotective effect in vitro. Crosslinking with RUT had occurred, but in a lower degree than GTA. Microspheres had not improved sun protection parameters, although, non-treated gelatin interfered positively with the SPF for both UV filters. The in vivo studies demonstrated that these materials had very good skin compatibility.

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 · 10.1590/s1984-82502016000400004

Cites

26 of 26 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?

  • Gelatine micro- and nano-spheres improve skin compatibility, safety, and efficacy.

    “Additionally, gelatine micro- and nano-spheres improved skin compatibility, safety, and efficacy [41,42,43] and alginate microparticles influenced photostability, through the reduction of the EHMC’s (21) photoisomerisation [34].”

    From UV Filters: Challenges and Prospects (2022) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Conclusion (page not provided) reports very good skin compatibility for the gelatin microspheres. It also says they did not improve estimated efficacy when combined with UV filters. This paper studied microspheres, not nanospheres, and its compatibility tests do not establish a broader improvement in safety. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    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
Graziola, F., Candido, T. M., Oliveira, C. A. D., Peres, D. D., Issa, M. G., Mota, J., Rosado, C., Consiglieri, V. O., Kaneko, T. M., Velasco, M. V. R., & Baby, A. R.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • University of São Paulo, Brazil
  • Universidade Lusófona (PT)
Venue
Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Published
2016-12
Volume
52
Issue
4
Pages
603-612
ISSN
1984-8250 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2593974696
Cited by
39
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (12/04435-9)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Collagen: Extraction and Characterization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Skin Protection and Aging
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Hydrogels: synthesis, properties, applications
Keywords
gelatin microspheres, glutaraldehyde crosslinking, rutin, polyphenols, flavonols, photoprotection, benzophenone-3, octyl methoxycinnamate, skin compatibility, stratum corneum hydration, biocompatibility

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