Efficacy and safety of a new peeling formulated with a pool of PHAs for the treatment of all skin types, even sensitive

Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology · 4 authors, 4 centres

AI SUMMARY

FIDELITY 100%

POPULATION30 healthy Caucasian female volunteers aged 25-64 years with sensitive and dry skin

INTERVENTIONRenewal Peel Serum based on ELPA25™ (containing mandelic acid, lactobionic acid, phytic acid, gluconolactone, and acetyl hexapeptide-8) applied 3 times per week for 8 weeks

COMPARISONMandelic acid serum (Serum A) and placebo serum, each applied to the contralateral half-face

This summary was generated by AI from a single paper. It has not been reviewed by a clinician and is not clinical advice. Verify against the source before acting on it.

AGENT 01 · STRUCTURED SUMMARY

TRACE TO SOURCE

“

TL;DR

This study evaluated a new serum containing a mixture of polyhydroxy acids (ELPA25™) for sensitive skin. After 8 weeks, the serum significantly improved skin roughness, wrinkle depth, firmness, and elasticity compared to mandelic acid alone and placebo. The findings support the use of this PHA-based serum as a well-tolerated and effective anti-aging treatment for sensitive skin.

Full summary

3,852 CHARS

**Background:** Chemical peels are widely used for skin rejuvenation but often cause irritation, especially in individuals with sensitive skin. Newer polyhydroxy acids (PHAs) such as gluconolactone and lactobionic acid have larger molecular weights and are gentler than traditional alpha-hydroxy acids. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel serum (Renewal Peel Serum) containing a patented mixture of PHAs (ELPA25™) compared to mandelic acid alone and placebo in women with sensitive skin.

**Methods:** A total of 30 healthy Caucasian female volunteers aged 25–64 years with sensitive and dry skin were enrolled. The study followed a half-face experimental protocol: each participant applied an active serum on one side of the face and a placebo on the other side. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A applied mandelic acid serum (Serum A) versus placebo; Group B applied ELPA25™ serum (Serum B) versus placebo. Serums were applied every other day (3 times per week) for 8 weeks. Assessments were performed at baseline (T0), after 4 weeks (T1), and after 8 weeks (T2). Measurements included: erythema index (Mexameter), transepidermal water loss (TEWL) (Tewameter), stratum corneum hydration (Corneometer), skin surface roughness (Ra and Rmax via PRIMOSpico 3D), skin firmness (R0) and elasticity (R2) (Cutometer), and stratum corneum renewal (tape stripping with SquameScan). Statistical analysis used paired t-tests with significance at p<0.05.

**Key Results:** Both active serums were well tolerated. Erythema index decreased significantly by about 3.5% after 8 weeks for both Serums A and B (p<0.01), with no significant changes in TEWL, indicating no barrier damage. Hydration increased significantly: Serum A improved hydration by +11.40% at 4 weeks and +23.68% at 8 weeks; Serum B improved by +20.49% at 4 weeks and +36.14% at 8 weeks (both p<0.0001). The active vs. placebo comparison showed significant hydration differences at 8 weeks for both groups (p=0.0006 for Group A; p=0.0128 for Group B). For anti-aging effects, Serum B reduced average roughness (Ra) by -13.49% at 4 weeks and -18.36% at 8 weeks, while Serum A reduced Ra by -3.60% and -8.13%, respectively. Maximum wrinkle depth (Rmax) decreased by -12.44% (4 weeks) and -19.93% (8 weeks) for Serum B, versus -9.36% and -12.53% for Serum A. Skin firmness (R0) improved more with Serum B (R0 decreased from 0.289 to 0.216 at 8 weeks) than with Serum A (0.293 to 0.234). Elasticity (R2) increased by +16.13% at 4 weeks and +29.25% at 8 weeks for Serum B, compared to +9.11% and +7.83% for Serum A. Stratum corneum renewal, measured by protein content removed via tape stripping, showed a significant decrease of -23.54% at 4 weeks and -25.22% at 8 weeks for Serum B (p=0.0002), indicating mild exfoliation and improved cohesion. Serum A showed a smaller, later effect (-11.56% at 8 weeks, p=0.0115). Placebo areas showed no significant changes.

**Clinical Implications:** The ELPA25™ serum demonstrated superior efficacy compared to mandelic acid alone across all measured parameters, including hydration, roughness, wrinkle reduction, firmness, elasticity, and stratum corneum renewal. The product was well tolerated with no significant irritation or barrier disruption, making it suitable for sensitive skin. The synergistic combination of PHAs (mandelic acid, gluconolactone, lactobionic acid, phytic acid) plus acetyl hexapeptide-8 appears to provide enhanced anti-aging benefits while maintaining gentleness. This study supports the use of this PHA-based serum as an effective and safe option for patients with sensitive skin seeking anti-aging treatment. Limitations include the small sample size, all-female Caucasian population, and short duration (8 weeks). Further studies in diverse populations and longer follow-up are warranted.

PICO

PPOPULATION

30 healthy Caucasian female volunteers aged 25-64 years with sensitive and dry skin

IINTERVENTION

Renewal Peel Serum based on ELPA25™ (containing mandelic acid, lactobionic acid, phytic acid, gluconolactone, and acetyl hexapeptide-8) applied 3 times per week for 8 weeks

OOUTCOME

Skin moisturization (corneometry), skin roughness (Ra, Rmax), wrinkle reduction, skin firmness (R0) and elasticity (R2), stratum corneum renewal (tape stripping protein content), and tolerability (erythema index, TEWL)

STUDY TYPE

RCT

SPECIALTY

dermatology

SUMMARISED BY

AI pipeline

FIDELITY CHECK

100% · A

ORIGINAL PAPER

PMC10087944

Efficacy and safety of a new peeling formulated with a pool of PHAs for the treatment of all skin types, even sensitive

Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology

READ THE FULL PAPER

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background Actually, the use of chemical peels in cosmetics and dermatology continues to grow due to their versatility, clinical endpoint–directed predictability, and favorable risk profile in comparison to lasers. The chemical peel is a generally safe method for treatment of some skin disorders and to refresh and rejuvenate the skin. The major challenge of chemical peels is the tolerability, that is because of sensitive skin which is one of the most common skin disorders. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the new Miamo Renewal Peel Serum formulated with a pool of new generation acids (ELPA25™) on sensitive skin with respect to mandelic acid serum only and with respect to placebo comparison. Materials and Methods The “in vivo” study following the half‐face experimental protocol active versus placebo involved 30 healthy Caucasian female volunteers between 25 and 64 years, with sensitive skin, who were divided into two different groups. ELPA25™ serum was applied in one group three times a week for 8 weeks. The other group, with the same protocol, applied an active serum containing mandelic acid, as control, versus placebo. In particular, skin moisturizing, skin viscoelastic properties, skin surface smoothness, wrinkle reduction, and stratum corneum renewal were evaluated. Results Renewal Peel Serum was very well tolerated from sensitive skin. A significant decrease in skin roughness and wrinkle breadth, and an improvement in firmness and in skin elasticity, was observed after 2 months of treatment with respect both to mandelic acid serum and to placebo comparison. Conclusions Scientific protocol using self‐controlled study methodology and noninvasive skin bioengineering techniques with adequate statistical methods were able to evaluate both the safety and the efficacy of the new Miamo Renewal Peel Serum. This study highlighted that the Miamo Renewal Peel Serum formulated with a patent‐pending mixture of new generation acids (ELPA25™) exerts many beneficial effects and it can be successfully employed for sensitive skin.

CITATION EXPORT

Giulia Gentili, Paola Perugini, Stefano Bugliaro et al.. Efficacy and safety of a new peeling formulated with a pool of PHAs for the treatment of all skin types, even sensitive. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.15215

AUTHORS

4 · 4 CENTRES

Giulia Gentili, Paola Perugini, Stefano Bugliaro, Camilla D'Antonio

1 Scientific Department Medspa Milano Italy
2 Department of Drug Sciences University of Pavia Pavia Italy
3 Etichub, Academic spin‐off University of Pavia Pavia Italy
4 Coslab Tecnologia Cosmetica Brescia Italy