Formulations containing an extract of Echinacea and linoleic acid derivatives
10952945 ยท 2021-03-23
Assignee
Inventors
Cpc classification
A61K36/28
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K9/06
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K31/201
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K8/361
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K31/201
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K47/14
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K2300/00
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K2300/00
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K36/28
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K9/0014
HUMAN NECESSITIES
International classification
A61K36/00
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K31/201
HUMAN NECESSITIES
A61K36/28
HUMAN NECESSITIES
Abstract
The present invention relates to pharmaceutical and cosmetic formulations containing an extract of Echinacea and linoleic acid derivatives, particularly emulsions containing an extract of Echinacea and linoleic acid derivatives as an active agent combination, and the use of such formulations as medicines, medicinal products and/or cosmetics.
Claims
1. Composition containing a) an extract of Echinacea and b) linoleic acid and/or linoleic acid derivatives, wherein the linoleic acid and/or linoleic acid derivatives are not part of the extract of Echinacea, wherein the extract of Echinacea is a CO.sub.2 extract, wherein the composition contains the components a) and b) in the following weight proportions: 1:1000 to 1:1.
2. Composition according to claim 1, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea is a lipophilic extract.
3. Composition according to claim 1, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea has an alkylamide content between 1 and 50%.
4. Composition according to claim 1, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea originates from the roots of Echinacea.
5. Composition according to claim 1, characterized in that the linoleic acid derivatives are linoleic acid esters.
6. Composition according to claim 1, characterized in that the linoleic acid derivatives are present in the form of a vegetable oil and/or vegetable oil extract.
7. Composition according to claim 1, further comprising one or more cosmetic and/or pharmaceutical adjuvants.
8. Composition according to claim 3, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea has an alkylamide content between 10% and 40%.
9. Composition according to claim 8, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea has an alkylamide content between 15% and 30%.
10. Composition according to claim 4, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea originates from Echinacea purpurea radix.
11. Composition according to claim 5, characterized in that the linoleic acid derivatives are glycerol triesters.
12. Composition according to claim 6, characterized in that the linoleic acid derivatives are present in the form of a safflower oil and/or safflower oil extract.
13. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the composition contains no other plant extracts.
14. Composition containing a) an extract of Echinacea and b) linoleic acid and/or linoleic acid derivatives, wherein the linoleic acid and/or linoleic acid derivatives are not part of the extract of Echinacea, wherein the extract of Echinacea is a CO.sub.2 extract, wherein 0.001-5 wt % Echinacea extract, and 0.001-10 wt % linoleic acid and/or a similar quantity of linoleic acid derivatives corresponding to 0.001-10 wt % linoleic acid, are contained, relative to the total weight of the composition in each case, wherein the linoleic acid and/or linoleic acid derivative is chosen from the group consisting of salicornia oil, evening primrose oil, grape seed oil, safflower oil, poppy seed oil, prickly pear seed oil, hemp oil, soya oil, cottonseed oil, wheatgerm oil, corn oil, sunflower oil, walnut oil, sesame oil, argan oil, pistachio oil, peanut oil, rapeseed oil, rice oil and olive oil.
15. Composition according to claim 14, characterized in that 0.025-2 wt % Echinacea extract relative to the weight of the total composition, 0.01-5 wt % linoleic acid and/or a similar quantity of linoleic acid derivatives corresponding to 0.01-5 wt % linoleic acid relative to the total weight of the composition in each case.
16. Composition according to claim 14, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea is a lipophilic extract.
17. Composition according to claim 14, wherein the extract of Echinacea has an alkylamide content between 1 and 50%.
18. Composition according to claim 14, further comprising one or more cosmetic and/or pharmaceutical adjuvants.
19. Composition according to claim 14, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea originates from the roots of Echinacea.
20. Composition according to claim 19, characterized in that the extract of Echinacea originates from Echinacea purpurea radix, wherein the composition contains no other plant extracts.
Description
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)
(22)
(23)
(24)
EXAMPLES
Example 1
(25) Determination of TRPV1 Agonistic Activity.
(26) A) Experimental Method
(27) 210.sup.4 293 T-VR1 cells (or parentale 293T cells as control) are cultivated in 96-well microtiter plates (Costar, Cambridge, Mass.) in 200 L Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium (DMEM), which also contains 10% foetal calf serum and 1% antibiotics (penicillin/streptomycin). The cells are incubated for 6 h with the test substances or the controls (capsaicin, TRPV1 agonist (1 M); capsazepine, TRPV1 antagonist (10 M); or capsaicin (1 M) and capsazepine (10 M)). Then, cell viability is determined.
(28) The cytotoxic effect of the test substances was determined using the MTT (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide) assay method. For this, 50 L of a solution of MTT in DMEM (5 mg/mL) were added to each well. These were then incubated in the dark for 4 h at 37 C. The reaction was stopped, the residue was removed and 100 L DMSO were added to each well. Incubation continued for 10 min with gentle shaking. Then the absorption at 550 nm was measured with a TECAN GENios Pro Plate Reader (Tecan Group Ltd., Switzerland). The results were presented as a percentage of the control (vehicle solution, 100%). The determination was performed in triplicate.
(29) B) Effects of test substances on the activation of TRPV1
(30)
(31) Cell viability was reduced to 54.9% by the treatment with the positive control, the TRPV1 agonist capsaicin. The TRPV1 antagonist capsazepine alone showed no effect (106.1% cell viability). The effect of capsaicin was blocked with capsazepine (101.3% cell viability), proving that the cytotoxic effect is mediated via TRPV1. No cytotoxic effect was observed in the cells that were treated with the extract of Echinacea (5 g/mL or 50 g/mL) (102.3 and 106.0% cell viability). Only a small, insignificant cytotoxic effect was observed in the cells that were treated with safflower oil (5 g/mL or 50 g/mL) (90.5 and 96.5%). Surprisingly, the cells treated with a mixture of the extract of Echinacea and safflower oil (5 g/mL respectively or 50 g/mL respectively) showed a clear, significant cytotoxic effect. With 85.0% cell viability, the magnitude of the effect was greater than for safflower oil alone, even at the lower concentration. In fact, at the higher concentration cell viability of only 79.3% was determined.
(32) Surprisingly, these results showed that the mixture of the Echinacea extract and safflower oil has a synergistic effect on the activation of TRPV1, which occurs even at lower concentrations and considerably surpasses the effects of the individual substances.
(33)
(34) In this experiment, the agonistic activity of the positive control capsaicin was found to be slightly lower (70.6% cell viability).
(35) As in the previous experiment, the effect of capsaicin could again be inhibited with the TRPV1 antagonist capsazepine (104.4% cell viability). The mixture Echinacea extract and safflower oil exhibited agonistic effects which varied as a function of the dose. For the highest concentration (50 g/mL in each case), an effect magnitude (51.2% cell viability) exceeding the effect of capsaicin was achieved.
Example 2
(36) Inhibition of Tyrosinase Activity in B16 Melanoma Cells
(37) A) Experimental Method
(38) For the determination of tyrosinase activity, mouse B16 melanoma cells (4A5, ATCC) were cultivated in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium (DMEM), which also contained 10% foetal calf serum and 1% antibiotics (penicillin/streptomycin). The cells were treated for three days with various concentrations of the test substances. Then, the cells were lysed for 30 min at 4 C. with a lysis buffer (20 mM sodium phosphate, pH 6.8, 1% triton X-100, 1 mM PMSF, 1 mM EDTA), containing a protease inhibitor cocktail. The lysates were centrifuted at 15,000g for 10 min. The residue was used as the tyrosinase source. The reaction mixture for determination of tyrosinase activity contains 20 mM phosphate buffer, pH 6.8, and 1.25 M L-Dopa (Sigma-Aldrich). After incubation for 30 min at 37 C., the formation of dopachrome was determined. For this, the absorption at a wavelength of 475 nm was measured in a microtiter plate reader (TriStar LB 941, Berthold Technologies, GmbH & Co. KG). Kojic acid was used as the positive control for the inhibition of tyrosinase activity.
(39) B) Inhibition of Tyrosinase Activity by the Test Substances
(40)
(41) For the kojic acid positive control, tyrosinase activity inhibition was determined to be at a level of 30.2%. No inhibition of tyrosinase activity was observed with the Echinacea extract in a test concentration of 5 g/mL. At the higher test concentration of 50 g/mL, inhibition at a level of 41.8% was determined. Accordingly, the effect was greater than that of the positive control.
(42)
(43) Kojic acid as a positive control exhibited tyrosinase activity inhibition at a level of 35.3%. No inhibition of tyrosinase activity was observed with safflower oil at either of the two test concentrations.
(44)
(45) These results show that by adding safflower oil to the extract of Echinacea it is possible to cancel the inhibition of tyrosinase activity with a constant test concentration of the Echinacea extract.
Example 3
(46) Regeneration of the Epidermal Barrier Following Treatment with Sodium Dodecyl Sulphate (SDS).
(47) The purpose of the study was to determine the influence of a composition according to the invention on the regeneration of impaired epidermal barrier function after treatment for twenty-four hours with sodium dodecyl sulphate (Patch Test).
(48) A) Study Design
(49) The study was a randomised, double-blind study with intra-individual comparison on dermatologically healthy test subjects (n=23).
(50) B) Performance of the Study
(51) On Day 1 of the study, a solution of 0.5% SDS was applied occlusively to the volar forearm using patches (Finn Chambers, extra large, on Scanpore) for 24 hours. After removal of the patch on Day 2, the damage to the epidermal barrier was measured. On Days 2 to 11, the test area was treated twice daily with the test products. Instrument measurements were conducted on Days 3, 5 and 8.
(52) A cream with Echinacea extract (0.5 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives (corresponding to the example cream described below) according to the invention and a placebo cream were used as the test products. The test products were applied twice daily over an area of 5 cm6 cm in each case. 2 mg/cm.sup.2 of the test substances were applied in each case.
(53) The test subjects were male and female. They were aged between 18 and 55 years.
(54) Determination of transepidermal water loss:
(55) Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) is a non-invasive method for determining the integrity of the epidermal barrier function of the stratum corneum and is considered to be a sensitive parameter for surfactant-induced skin irritation. TEWL was determined with a DermaLab (Cortex, Denmark) (triple determination). The measuring probe was placed on the skin surface to be measured for 40 s for each measurement. The first 20 s served to equilibrate the system. The values from the second 20 s were averaged and evaluated as a measurement value. Values for TEWL were expressed with the unit g/m.sup.2h. The usual range for normal, non-irritated skin is between 3 and 9 g/m.sup.2h. Mildly irritated skin with an impaired epidermal barrier typically returns values between 10 and 18 g/m.sup.2h depending on the test subjects' starting values. Heavily irritated skin with a significantly impaired epidermal barrier prompts values >25 g/m.sup.2h. Thus, a rise in TEWL values is indicative of impaired function of the epidermal barrier.
(56) C) Effects of the Test Products on the Epidermal Barrier
(57)
(58) The application of both test products resulted in a marked reduction of transepidermal water loss, which was >20 g/m.sup.2h on Day 2. Surprisingly, the results showed that the effect of the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention on the reduction of transepidermal water loss is significantly greater than with the placebo cream on Day 8.
Example 4
(59) Study on Patients with Atopic Dermatitis (3 Months)
(60) A) Study Design
(61) The study was a randomised, double-blind study with comparison product control and with intra-individual comparison.
(62) B) Performance of the Study
(63) The cream with Echinacea extract (0.5 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives (corresponding to the example cream described below) according to the invention and a conventional cream (water-in-oil cream, fat content approx. 55%, approx. 2.5% plant extract containing betulin) as the comparison preparation were used as the test preparations. The products were applied twice daily. The products were applied to contralateral skin surfaces over an area of 1600 cm.sup.2 (4040 cm, approx. 9% of the surface of an adult man) for each product in each case. The cubital fossa and the entire arm or alternatively the popliteal fossa and the half of the leg above and below the knees or the half of one side of the upper body were selected as application sites. The products were applied for about 3 months (85 days). The application quantity was 1.5 g per product application. Pruritus was evaluated by the investigating physician and the patient gave a subjective evaluation of the sensation of dryness on Days 1 (Start), 29 (1 month), 57 (2 months) and 85 (3 months).
(64) C) Reduction of Sensation of Skin Dryness and Pruritus Following Treatment with the Cream with Echinacea Extract and Linoleic Acid Derivatives According to the Invention (n=46-48)
(65)
(66) Following treatment with the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention, the sensation of skin dryness was reduced by 40% on Day 29 compared with the start of treatment. On Days 57 and 85, the reduction was 40% and 50% respectively. The reduction of the sensation of skin dryness on Day 85 was significantly greater than with the comparison preparation (35%).
(67)
(68) Following treatment with the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention, pruritus was reduced by 47.6% on Day 29 compared with the start of treatment. On Days 57 and 85, pruritus reduction was 52.4%. The reduction of the sensation of skin dryness on Days 57 and 85 was significantly greater than with the comparison preparation (33.3% in each case).
Example 5
(69) 14 d Study in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis
(70) A) Study Design
(71) The study with conducted with an intra-individual, double-blind comparison.
(72) B) Performance of the Study
(73) The study was conducted on test subjects with atopic diathesis (aged from 18 to 70 years (22 female, 3 male, local SCORAD between 1 and 15)). The cream with Echinacea extract (0.5 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention and the body milk containing Echinacea extract (0.1 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention (corresponding to the example cream and example body milk described below) were used as the test preparations. The products were applied twice daily for 14 days.
(74) Skin moisture was determined on Day 1 and Day 15 by corneometry. The examination of the epidermal skin barrier was carried out directly without invasive sampling by Microscopy Services Dahnhardt (Flintbek, Germany) using the Lipbarvis (Lipid Barrier Visualisation, LBV) analytical method. For this purposes, skin samples of three to five cell layers were taken by means of a particularly gentle adhesive/carrier system.
(75) Before/After comparisons of the lipid lamellas (LBV-TEM): The samples were prepared and examined with a transmission electron microscope. A special software program determined the length of the lipid lamellas and correlated this with the intercellular space. The number of lipid lamellas enables very accurate conclusions to be drawn regarding the effectiveness of the active agent applied.
(76) Determination of Skin Lipids (LBV-LIP):
(77) The important skin lipids such as cholesterol, fatty acids, ceramides EOS, NP and NH were determined quantitatively by HPTLC analysis (High Performance Thin Layer Chromatography) of the skin sample for total and individual lipids.
(78) C) Increase of Lipid Lamellas Following Treatment with the Cream with Echinacea Extract and Linoleic Acid Derivatives According to the Invention or the Body Milk Containing Echinacea Extract and Linoleic Acid Derivatives According to the Invention, Increased Synthesis of the Skin's Own Lipids and Increase in Skin Moisture (n=20)
(79)
(80) In both cases, a significant increase in the lipid lamella count was found according to the invention.
(81)
(82) An increase in the cholesterol content was found for both products. The difference was particularly significant for the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention.
(83)
(84) For both products, a significant increase in the free fatty acid content according to the invention was found.
(85)
(86) An increase in the ceramide EOS content was found for both products according to the invention. The difference was particularly significant for the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention.
(87)
(88) An increase in the ceramide NP content was found for both products according to the invention. The difference was particularly significant for the body milk with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention.
(89)
(90) An increase in the ceramide NH content was found for both products according to the invention. The difference was particularly significant for the body milk with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention.
(91)
(92) An increase in the total lipid content was found for both products according to the invention. The difference was significant for both groups.
(93)
(94) Skin moisture was increased significantly following treatment with the cream containing Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention or the body milk containing Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention.
Example 6
(95) Clinical Study to Investigate Potential for Irritation and Sensitisation
(96) A) Study Design
(97) The study was a double-blind, randomised, single-centre study with comparison product control.
(98) B) Performance of the Study
(99) The study was conducted with 105 volunteer test subjects (aged between 18 and 75 years, female and male, skin phototype I-IV, no acute skin diseases on the exposed areas). The cream with Echinacea extract (0.5 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention and the body milk containing Echinacea extract (0.1 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention (corresponding to the example cream and example body milk described below) as well as the placebo of the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention were used as the test preparations.
(100) Irritation/Induction Phase:
(101) The products were applied to the same patch site continuously for 14 days occlusively with FinnChamber Large (18 mm) on Fixomull Stretch. Applications were made six times for 48 or 72 hours (150 L per application). The test areas were located on the lower back. The erythema was evaluated visually using a scale from 0-6, 10-30 minutes after removal of the patch (Days 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15).
(102) Challenge Phase (One Week Recuperation Following the Induction Phase):
(103) The products were applied occlusively with FinnChamber Large (18 mm) on Fixomull Stretch. One application was made for 48 hours (150 L per application). The test areas were located on the upper arm. The erythema was evaluated visually using a scale from 0-6, 10-30 minutes and 48 hours after removal of the patch.
(104) Statistical Methods:
(105) Irritation potential: The Cumulative Irritation Score for each subject was calculated as the total of the scores during the Irritation phase. The value from the preceding evaluation was used for any missing values. If a degree of 2 or more was recorded, the value of the second degree was transferred. A descriptive statistic (Average, Standard deviation, Minimum, Maximum and Median) was compiled for the Cumulative Irritation Score.
(106) Sensitisation Potential:
(107) The following categories of sensitisation potential were used:
(108) Low: No subject reacts with a second degree or higher, or up to two subjects react with first degree to both evaluation points during the sensitisation phase.
(109) Moderate: Up to two subjects react with a second degree or higher, or up to four subjects react with a first degree to both to both evaluation points during the sensitisation phase.
(110) High: More than two subjects react with a second degree or higher, or more than four subjects react with first degree to both evaluation points during the sensitisation phase.
(111) C) Irritation and Sensitisation Potential
(112) A low to moderate irritation potential was found for all products tested. In this context, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups. A 48-hour occlusive application of the test product during the challenge phase did not result in the formation of first degree erythemas or higher on Days 24 and 26. According to the protocol, all products were categorised as having low sensitisation potential.
(113) In view of the repeated occlusive applications for 48 hours without interruption between the applications, the absence of or low levels of irritation after the first application and the low levels of additional clinical signs of irritation, the skin tolerability of all products was categorised as good to very good. The sensitisation potential was classified as low with undetectable allergenic potential.
Example 7
(114) Clinical SDS Irritation Study
(115) A) Study Design
(116) The study was conducted as a blind study.
(117) B) Performance of the Study
(118) The study was conducted with 44 female test subjects. All test subjects participated in the 24-hour occlusive treatment with SDS (sodium dodecyl sulphate). Nine test subjects were excluded after evaluation of the baseline due to insufficient or inconsistent SDS irritations. Three further test subjects were excluded before the baseline evaluation due to excessive SDS irritation. The 31 test subjects who participated in the study until its conclusion were between 24.9 and 65.6 years old. The creams with Echinacea extract (1 and 2 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention were used as test preparations. Comparisons were made with untreated skin and with skin that was irritated with SDS (non-irritated/untreated, irritation with SDS/untreated). The primary objective was to evaluate the cosmetic properties of both creams with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention. The secondary objective was to determine the influence of the creams with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention on the reduction of erythema.
(119) The epidermal barrier on the test sites on the test subjects' forearms was damaged by occlusive application for 24 hours of a 2% SDS solution in FinnChamber (18 mm). Transepidermal water loss (TEWL, DermaLab) and hydration of the skin (Corneometer MDD4) was measured 4 h, 48 h, 3 d and 6 d after the irritation with SDS. In addition, the erythema was assessed visually (categorisation by technical experts). The two creams with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention were applied to two test sites at random. A further test site on the forearm remained untreated. A test site on the upper arm served as a control site (not irritated/untreated). The two creams with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention (2 L/cm.sup.2) were applied twice daily.
(120) The measurements and visual evaluations were carried out at the following times: before the treatment with product, 4 h after removal of the patch (t.sub.0) after the 4th product application, 48 h after removal of the patch (t.sub.1) after the 6th product application, 3 d after removal of the patch (t.sub.2) after the 12th product application, 5 d after removal of the patch (t.sub.3)
(121) C) Transepidermal Water Loss (TEWL)
(122) The treatment with the cream containing Echinacea extract (1 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention resulted in a slight, insignificant reduction in TEWL compared with the untreated site at times t.sub.0 and t.sub.1. No major differences between the two groups were detected at times t.sub.2 and t.sub.3. Following treatment with the cream containing Echinacea extract (2 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention, the TEWL values were generally higher than in the case of untreated skin. Elevated TEWL is an indicator of reduced epidermal barrier function. The results are presented in Table 1.
(123) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Transepidermal water loss (TEWL), original data in g/m.sup.2h) Measurement SDS irritated/ time untreated 1% cream 2% cream t.sub.0 41.3 39.9 41.5 t.sub.1 30.7 28.6 32.0 t.sub.2 18.6 19.1 22.2 t.sub.3 10.9 11.5 13.1
(124) D) Skin Hydration (Corneometer)
(125) The test sites that were treated with the creams with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention exhibited statistically significantly increased values for skin hydration on the treated test sites compared with the SDS-irritated, untreated skin sites at t.sub.2 and t.sub.3. The values for hydration of the skin were also higher at t.sub.1. The results are presented in Table 2.
(126) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Skin hydration, original data [AU] Measurement SDS irritated/ time untreated 1% cream 2% cream t.sub.0 35.6 35.1 33.0 t.sub.1 19.3 20.9 20.6 t.sub.2 11.9 15.9 14.9 t.sub.3 9.6 16.1 12.8
(127) E) Visual Determination of Erythema
(128) As expected, erythema was not observed on the non-irritated, untreated test sites. Consequently, the Erythema Scores were significantly higher on all irritated sites. No major difference was observed between the sites treated with the cream with Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention and the untreated sites irritated with SDS. However, it was found that at t.sub.3 the score for the sites treated with the cream with Echinacea extract (1 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention was lower than for the untreated sites irritated with SDS. In contrast to this, a lower score for the sites treated with the cream with Echinacea extract (2 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention was only found at t.sub.0. At all other measurement times, the Erythema Score was higher than for the untreated sites that were irritated with SDS (insignificant). The results are presented in Table 3.
(129) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Visual evaluation of erythema, original data Not SDS Measurement irritated/ irritated/ time untreated untreated 1% cream 2% cream t.sub.0 0.00 1.69 1.69 1.61 t.sub.1 0.00 1.44 1.47 1.50 t.sub.2 0.00 1.19 1.21 1.29 t.sub.3 0.00 0.94 0.87 0.97
(130) In summary, it was found that the creams with Echinacea extract (1 wt % and 2 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives according to the invention have a positive influence on skin moisture. This advantage outweighs the slightly elevated irritation which was also observed when the Echinacea extract was used in higher concentrations.
Example 8
(131) Stability of the Formulations
(132) The cream with Echinacea extract (0.5 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives and the body milk with Echinacea extract (0.1 wt %) and linoleic acid derivatives (corresponding to the example cream and example body milk described below) were subjected to a long-term stability test. For this, samples were placed in storage under differing conditions (25 C./60% RH, 30 C./65% RH and 40 C./75% RH). The result of the tests revealed that both formulations have a shelf life of at least two years at room temperature.
(133) Surprisingly, it was demonstrated in the examples 3 to 5 presented above that the cream according to the invention and the body milk according to the invention containing Echinacea extract and linoleic acid derivatives have a positive influence on the epidermal barrier function of the skin.
(134) The treatment led to a significant increase in the numbers of the skin's own lipids, which are essential for restoring and maintaining the epidermal barrier. In particular, the content of ceramide EOS was also increased, which is particularly important for the stability of the lipid bilayers in the stratum corneum because of the nail function.
(135) A reduction of transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and in increase in skin moisture were demonstrated macroscopically in the studies. Moreover, pruritus was reduced following treatment with the products according to the invention.
(136) The examples listed above show that, surprisingly, not only skin hydration can be improved in test subjects without epidermal barrier damage, as described in Yotsawimonwat S, et al., Im J Cosm Sci 2010, 32, 340-346, but that the formulations according to the invention can also help to regenerate an epidermal barrier which is already impaired. It is particularly noteworthy in this context that the formulations according to the invention differ from the known formulations containing Echinacea in more than just the additional presence of linoleic acid/linoleic acid derivatives. The extracts of Echinacea purpurea used are also different. Yotsawimonwat et al. used an alcoholic extract from the aboveground parts of Echinacea, which has a high content of phenolic components with antioxidant effect. The alkylamide content in such extracts is very low. The formulations according to the invention preferably contain an extract from the Echinacea roots. This has preferably been obtained using supercritical CO.sub.2, and thus contains a high proportion of lipophilic alkylamides and no phenols.
(137) It was also surprisingly found that the formulations according to the invention are able to be stored for a period of more than two years. This is also the case when they are stored at room temperature. In contrast, the formulations described by Yotsawimonwat et al. could only be stored for a maximum of 7 months at a temperature of 4 C. after the addition of an antioxidant.
(138) It was also surprising to the person skilled in the art that the composition according to the invention exhibits antipruritic effects.
(139) Examples of Compositions/Formulations According to the Present Invention:
(140) Cream with 2% Echinacea purpurea Radix CO.sub.2 Extract:
(141) TABLE-US-00004 Arlacel 1690 1.600 kg Hexyldecyl laurate 2.000 kg Beeswax 0.375 kg Orange peel wax 0.450 kg Decyl oleate 1.200 kg Oxynex LM 0.030 kg Zinc stearate 0.375 kg Safflower oil 2.550 kg Isopropyl myristate 1.500 kg Echinacea purpurea radix CO.sub.2 extract 0.600 kg Benzyl alcohol 0.300 kg Magnesium sulphate heptahydrate 0.150 kg Glycerol 0.900 kg Water, purified 17.970 kg
(142) Cream with 1% Echinacea purpurea Radix CO.sub.2 Extract:
(143) TABLE-US-00005 Arlacel 1690 1.600 kg Hexyldecyl laurate 2.000 kg Beeswax 0.375 kg Orange peel wax 0.450 kg Decyl oleate 1.200 kg Oxynex LM 0.030 kg Zinc stearate 0.375 kg Safflower oil 2.550 kg Isopropyl myristate 1.500 kg Echinacea purpurea radix CO.sub.2 extract 0.300 kg Benzyl alcohol 0.300 kg Magnesium sulphate heptahydrate 0.150 kg Glycerol 0.900 kg Water, purified 18.270 kg
(144) Cream with 0.5% Echinacea purpurea Radix CO.sub.2 Extract:
(145) TABLE-US-00006 Arlacel 1690 1.600 kg Hexyldecyl laurate 2.000 kg Beeswax 0.375 kg Orange peel wax 0.450 kg Decyl oleate 1.200 kg Oxynex LM 0.030 kg Zinc stearate 0.375 kg Safflower oil 2.550 kg Isopropyl myristate 1.500 kg Echinacea purpurea radix CO.sub.2 extract 0.150 kg Benzyl alcohol 0.300 kg Magnesium sulphate heptahydrate 0.150 kg Glycerol 0.900 kg Water, purified 18.420 kg
(146) Body Milk with 0.1% Echinacea purpurea Radix CO.sub.2 Extract:
(147) TABLE-US-00007 Zinc stearate 0.300 kg Orange peel wax 0.200 kg Arlacel 1690 1.500 kg Hexyldecyl laurate 2.500 kg Safflower oil 2.550 kg Decyl oleate 1.500 kg Isopropyl myristate 1.200 kg Benzyl alcohol 0.300 kg Oxynex LM 0.030 kg Echinacea purpurea radix CO.sub.2 extract 0.030 kg Magnesium sulphate heptahydrate 0.150 kg Glycerol 0.900 kg Water, purified 18.840 kg
(148) Body Milk with 0.02% Echinacea purpurea Radix CO.sub.2 Extract:
(149) TABLE-US-00008 Zinc stearate 0.300 kg Orange peel wax 0.200 kg Arlacel 1690 1.500 kg Hexyldecyl laurate 2.500 kg Safflower oil 2.550 kg Decyl oleate 1.500 kg Isopropyl myristate 1.200 kg Benzyl alcohol 0.300 kg Oxynex LM 0.030 kg Echinacea purpurea radix CO.sub.2 extract 0.006 kg Magnesium sulphate heptahydrate 0.150 kg Glycerol 0.900 kg Water, purified 18.864 kg