DEODORANT COMPOSITION

Abstract

Cosmetic formulation with deodorant activity for topical application including vitamin E or an ester thereof, starch, sodium bicarbonate, zinc oxide and a cosmetically acceptable carrier is disclosed. The vitamin E ester is preferably alpha-tocopherol acetate, n-propionate or linoleate and the vitamin E or ester thereof and is present in an amount of 5-40% by weight of the weight of the formulation.

Claims

1. A cosmetic formulation with deodorant activity for topical application, comprising vitamin E or an ester thereof, starch, sodium bicarbonate, zinc oxide and a cosmetically acceptable vehicle, wherein said vitamin E or an ester thereof is contained in an amount of 5-40% by weight of the weight of the formulation.

2. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, wherein said vitamin E ester is an alpha-tocopherol ester with a carboxylic acid of formula R—COOH, wherein R is an alkyl radical having from 1 to 19 carbon atoms, or an alkenyl or alkynyl radical having from 2 to 19 carbon atoms.

3. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 2, wherein said vitamin E ester is alpha-tocopherol acetate, alpha-tocopherol n-propionate or alpha-tocopherol linoleate.

4. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 2, wherein said vitamin E ester is alpha-tocopherol acetate.

5. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1 wherein said starch is selected from the group consisting of rice, corn, wheat, oats, quinoa, peas, Pueraria lobata, tapioca and barley starches.

6. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1 wherein said starch is contained in an amount of between 1 and 20% by weight of the total weight of the formulation.

7. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1 wherein said sodium bicarbonate is contained in an amount comprised of between 1 and 30% by weight of the total weight of the formulation.

8. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, wherein said zinc oxide is contained in an amount comprised of between 1 and 10% by weight of the total weight of the formulation.

9. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, wherein said cosmetically acceptable vehicle consists of a siloxane selected from the group consisting of pentamer cyclomethicone, tetramer cyclomethicone, hexamer cyclomethicone, hexamethyldisiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane, disiloxane, trisiloxane and mixtures thereof.

10. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 9, wherein said siloxane is a polydimethylsiloxane (dimethicone).

11. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, wherein said cosmetically acceptable vehicle comprises a hydrocarbon selected from the group consisting of hydrogenated polyisobutene (Hydrogenated Polyisobutene), hydrogenated polydecene (Hydrogenated Polydecene), mixtures of hydrogenated polyisobutene and/or hydrogenated polydecene with hydrogenated polyolefins (Hydrogenated C.sub.6-14 Polyolefin), undecane (Undecane), isododecane (Isododecane), mixtures of isododecane with hydrogenated tetradecenyl-methylpentadecene (Hydrogenated Tetradecenyl/Methylpentadecene) or with polyoxypropylene (3) myristyl ether neoheptanoate (PPG-3 Myristyl Ether Neoheptanoate), tridecane (Tridecane) and mixtures thereof.

12. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, consisting of: TABLE-US-00007 Alpha-tocopherol acetate 25-30% Sodium bicarbonate 16-20% Rice starch 13-17% Zinc oxide  2-4% Dimethicone 25-30% and Hydrogenated castor oil   7-9%.

13. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, wherein said cosmetically acceptable vehicle comprises water and an emulsifying agent and optionally a preservative agent and/or a long chain (C.sub.12-C.sub.20) alcohol.

14. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 13, wherein said emulsifying agent is selected from the group consisting of mono- and diglycerides of C.sub.12-C.sub.20 fatty acids and sorbitan C.sub.12-C.sub.20 fatty acid esters.

15. The formulation according to claim 13, wherein said emulsifying agent is glyceryl monostearate.

16. The formulation according to claim 13, wherein said at least one preservative agent is a mixture of glycerine, caprylyl glycol and caprylhydroxamic acid and said at least one long chain alcohol is cetylstearyl alcohol.

17. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 9, wherein said cosmetically acceptable vehicle further comprises hydrogenated castor oil.

18. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 1, wherein said vitamin E or an ester thereof is contained in an amount of 15-35% by weight of the weight of the formulation.

19. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 5 wherein said starch is rice starch. starches.

20. The cosmetic formulation according to claim 6 wherein said starch is contained in an amount of 5-18% by weight of the total weight of the formulation.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0036] The present invention will be further described with reference to some embodiments and to an efficacy evaluation test for an exemplary formulation in comparison with a known formulation.

Example 1

[0037] Deodorant in the Form of Hydrophobic Gel

TABLE-US-00002 Alpha-tocopherol acetate 28.1% Sodium bicarbonate 18.0% Rice starch 15.0% Zinc oxide 3.0% Dimethicone 27.9% Hydrogenated castor oil 8.0%

[0038] The hydrogenated castor oil and the alpha-tocopherol acetate are heated to 85° C. and emulsified under vacuum inside a turboemulsifier with a rotation speed of 2200 rpm. Then, inside the turboemulsifier, with the turbine kept rotating, in the following order, zinc oxide, sodium bicarbonate and rice starch are added. Once complete homogenization is obtained, dimethicone is slowly introduced into the turboemulsifier under continuous homogenization, until the temperature drops to about 50° C. At this point, turbine cooling at 1300 rpm is started until reaching 40° C. The cooling is then continued, by operating the planetary agitator in place of the turbine, until reaching 30° C. At this point, the hydrophobic gel thus obtained is dosed inside plastic tubes.

Example 2

[0039] Stick Deodorant

TABLE-US-00003 Glyceril monostearate SE .sup. 5% Cetyl stearyl alcohol 65/35 .sup. 2% Sorbitan Olivate .sup. 3% Caprylyl Glycol 0.6% Glycerin 0.2% Caprylhydroxamic acid 0.2% Alpha-tocopherol acetate  20% Water  33% Sodium bicarbonate 18.0%  Rice starch 15.0%  Zinc oxide 3.0%

[0040] The following are heated to 85° C.: alpha-tocopherol acetate, glyceryl monostearate, cetylstearyl alcohol, Sorbitan Olivate, Caprylyl Glycol, Glycerin and Caprylhydroxamic acid. The water is heated separately and, within a turboemulsifier, the two phases are turbine-emulsified with a rotation speed of 2200 rpm. Then, inside the turboemulsifier, with the turbine kept rotating, in the following order, zinc oxide, sodium bicarbonate and rice starch are added. At this point, turbine cooling is started at 1300 rpm until reaching 40° C. The cooling is then continued, by operating the planetary agitator in place of the turbine, until reaching 30° C. At this point, the emulsion thus obtained is dosed inside cases for stick deodorants.

Example 3

[0041]

TABLE-US-00004 Caprylyl Glycol 0.75% Glycerin 0.15% Caprylhydroxamic acid  0.1% Alpha-tocopherol acetate 28.1% Water 30.4% Sodium bicarbonate 18.0% Rice starch 15.0% Zinc oxide  3.0% Carbomer  1.5% Triethanolamine   3%

[0042] The water is dosed inside the turboemulsifier, the carbomer is added under stirring at 2000 rpm. Still under stirring, alpha-tocopherol acetate, caprylyl glycol, Caprylhydroxamic acid and glycerine are introduced into the turboemulsifier. Then zinc oxide, sodium bicarbonate and rice starch are introduced, in this order, into the turboemulsifier, with the turbine kept rotating. The pH is brought to neutrality with Triethanolamine, and mixing is performed for about 30 minutes. At this point, the emulsion thus obtained is dosed inside tubes.

[0043] The formulation of example 1 was subjected to an in vivo evaluation test of the deodorant efficacy in comparison with the Lavilin product, marketed by the Israeli company Hlavin, whose composition is shown below (INCI name):

[0044] RICINUS COMMUNIS (CASTOR) SEED OIL, TALC (CI77718), CI 77967 (ZINC OXIDE), POTATO STARCH MODIFIED, HYDROGENATED CASTOR OIL, COPERNICIA CERIFERA (CARNAUBA) WAX, GLYCINE SOJA (SOYBEAN) OIL, AQUAHYLYA, RECYCLED, TRIETHYL CITRATE, LACTOSE, LACTIC PROTEINUM (MILK PROTEIN), BIFIDA FERMENT LYSATE, CALENDULA OFFICINALIS FLOWER EXTRACT, PARFUM FRAGRANCE), PHENOXYETHANOL, O-CYMEN-5 OL, BENZYL ALCOHOLOLAN SANYA POTOLANA, ARNICA MONTANA.

[0045] The test was aimed at evaluating in vivo the sweat odor reducing effect of the two compared deodorant products, after the single application of the cosmetic products under examination. The evaluation of deodorant effectiveness of was performed according to a method based on the EEMCO guidelines on the SNIFF TEST (G E Pierard, P. Elsner, R. Marks, P. Masson, M. Paye, and the EEMCO Group, EEMCO Guidance for the Efficacy Assessment of Antiperspirants and Deodorants, Skin Pharmacology and Applied Skin Physiology 2003; 16: 324-342).

[0046] The test was performed on 20 healthy volunteers, selected after applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria.

[0047] Characteristics of the Volunteer Panel [0048] 20 volunteers: 45% women, 55% men; [0049] Age: 21-66. Average age: 42.8; [0050] Volunteers developing body odor 1.5 (SNIFF TEST evaluation scale).

[0051] Pre-Selection Criteria for Volunteers: [0052] Good state of health. [0053] No skin pathologies. [0054] No ongoing topical drug treatments. [0055] Negative history of atopy. [0056] Exclusions: pregnant and breastfeeding women, minors. [0057] Commitment not to use other topical products in the area to be treated during the duration of the test and not to apply other products in the test areas for at least 7 days before the start of the test.

[0058] Volunteers were advised not to apply any perfume and/or other products in order not to create possible interference in the assessments, which could influence the test result.

[0059] Before starting the test, the deodorants under examination, a neutral non-perfumed soap and a cotton shirt, properly washed with a fragrance-free detergent, identified with a unique code for each volunteer, were delivered to each volunteer.

[0060] After careful ablution with a neutral fragrance-free soap, the deodorants were applied by an operator on each volunteer in a standardized way, so as to cover the entire axillary cavity.

[0061] The panel, made up of 20 volunteers, was randomly divided into two groups of 10 volunteers: [0062] PANEL I: deodorant A (formulation of example 1) was applied to 10 volunteers in the right armpit and deodorant B (Lavilin deodorant) in the left armpit; [0063] PANEL II: deodorant A was applied in the left armpit and deodorant B was applied in the right armpit of 10 volunteers.

[0064] The sweat odor assessment is performed by the 4 trained judges 24 hours after application;

T0—Application of the Product:

[0065] At the testing centre, the volunteer performed an accurate armpit ablution with a neutral, fragrance-free soap; the deodorants were applied by an operator, on each volunteer, in a standardized way so as to cover the entire axillary cavity, in particular, by applying a known quantity of deodorant cream.

[0066] At this point, the volunteer wears the adherent and unscented cotton T-shirt, especially washed with suitable fragrance-free detergents and undertakes to observe all the indications contained in the information note delivered to him.

T1—Evaluation 24 Hours after Application:

[0067] The volunteer hands over the shirt he has worn. An operator collects the shirts worn by the volunteers and prepares the shirts for judges' evaluation. The sweat odor assessment follows the score shown in the following Table 1.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 1 SCORE SWEAT SMELL INTENSITY SCORE Absent 0 Slightly perceptible 1 Clearly perceptible 2 Moderate 3 Strong 4 Very strong 5

[0068] The indicated score was expressed as the average of the judgments given by the 4 judges (2 men and 2 women), on each shirt.

[0069] According to the SNIFF TEST score, the effectiveness of the product is inversely proportional to the score obtained for the smell of sweat.

[0070] The following table shows the results of the judges' assessments for each volunteer.

TABLE-US-00006 After 24 hours Volunteer identification Formulation number Sex Age (years) Example 1 Lavilin 1 M 21 0.8 0.3 2 M 22 1.0 1.0 3 M 39 1.0 2.3 4 F 41 0.0 0.8 5 F 36 0.0 0.3 6 M 66 0.3 0.5 7 M 47 0.3 0.5 8 F 38 0.5 0.5 9 F 37 1.0 1.3 10 F 38 0.8 1.0 11 F 36 1.5 1.5 12 F 44 1.3 0.8 13 M 52 0.8 0.3 14 F 44 1.5 1.8 15 M 36 0.8 2.0 16 M 36 0.5 0.3 17 M 65 0.8 1.5 18 M 58 0.0 0.0 19 M 63 0.5 0.3 20 F 37 1.3 1.8 Average 0.71 0.91 Standard deviation 0.47 0.68

[0071] The table above clearly shows that the formulation of Example 1 has a higher deodorant efficacy than that of the Lavilin product, being the known technique closest to the present invention.