USE OF [6]-PARADOL FOR STABILIZATION OF COSMETIC COMPOSITIONS

Abstract

Suggested is the use of [6]-paradol for stabilizing cosmetic compositions, wherein the cosmetic compositions are selected from the group consisting of cleansing compositions and fragrance compositions.

Claims

1. A method for stabilizing a cosmetic composition, the method comprising adding [6]-paradol to a cosmetic composition, wherein the cosmetic composition is selected from the group consisting of a cleansing composition, a fragrance composition, and combinations thereof.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein [6]-paradol stabilizes at least one property selected from the group consisting of an odor of the cosmetic composition, a color of the cosmetic composition, and combinations thereof.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein [6]-paradol is added to the cosmetic composition in an amount of from 0.00001 to 1 wt. % based on the total weight of the cosmetic composition.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cosmetic composition is free of butylated hydroxytoluene.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein [6]-paradol is added as a mixture with a solvent to the cosmetic composition.

6. The method according to claim 5, wherein the solvent is selected from the group consisting of a water soluble solvent, a miscible solvent, and combinations thereof.

7. The method according to claim 5, wherein the solvent is selected from the group consisting of Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride dipropylene glycol, and combinations thereof.

8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cleansing composition is a soap.

9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the fragrance composition is an Eau de toilette.

10-15. (canceled)

16. A stable cosmetic composition comprising [6]-paradol, wherein the stable cosmetic composition is selected from the group consisting of a cleansing composition, a fragrance composition, and combinations thereof.

17. The stable cosmetic composition according to claim 16, wherein the composition exhibits at least one stabilized property, wherein the at least one stabilized property is selected from the group consisting of an odor, a color, and combinations thereof.

18. The stable cosmetic composition according to claim 16, wherein the cleansing composition is a soap.

19. The stable cosmetic composition according to claim 16, wherein the fragrance composition is an eau de toilette.

Description

FIGURES

[0043] The invention will be explained in further detail with reference to specific embodiments as shown in the drawings, in which

[0044] FIG. 1 shows results of Soap base 1 regarding oxidative rancidity (peroxide value)

[0045] FIG. 2 shows results of Soap base 2 regarding oxidative rancidity (peroxide value)

[0046] FIG. 3 shows results of Soap base 1 regarding oxidative rancidity (colorimetric measurement)

[0047] FIG. 4 shows results of Soap base 2 regarding oxidative rancidity (colorimetric measurement)

[0048] FIG. 5 shows results of Soap base 1 regarding oxidative rancidity (oxipress test)

[0049] FIG. 6 shows results of Soap base 2 regarding oxidative rancidity (oxipress test)

[0050] FIG. 7 shows results of Soap base 1 regarding color protection (colorimetric measurement)

[0051] FIG. 8 shows results of Soap base 2 regarding color protection (colorimetric measurement)

[0052] FIG. 9 shows results of Soap base 1 regarding color protection (oxipress test)

[0053] FIG. 10 shows results of Soap base 2 regarding color protection (oxipress test)

EXAMPLES

Example 1: Stabilization of Fragrance Compositions

[0054] The study has been launched with two fragrances (namely FEROCE and ECLAT) to verify if [6]-paradol can be a replacement of BHT in fragrance compositions. The efficacy of [6]-paradol was compared to BHT, alone, on the protection of fragrance ECLAT and, in presence of EDTA, on the protection fragrance FEROCE.

[0055] Fragrance ECLAT is supposedly very sensitive to discoloration issues while Fragrance FEROCE is believed to be susceptible to color and odor deviations.

[0056] Odor Description of Fragrance FEROCE:

[0057] TOP notes: Bergamot, Citrus

[0058] HEART notes: Floral, Jasmin, Gardenia

[0059] BASE notes: Wood, Cedarwood, Animal, Musk, Sandalwood

[0060] Odor Description Fragrance ECLAT:

[0061] TOP notes: Pepper, Leafy green, Mandarin

[0062] HEART notes: Jasmin, Floral, Lily of the valley, Rosewood, Orris, Violet,

[0063] BASE notes: Wood, Musk, Sandalwood, Balsam, Cedarwood, Animal

[0064] 6-paradol was previously solubilized in the solvent, either ethanol or DPG at a concentration of 10% (blend). The blend was then added to the fragrance formulation to achieve a final concentration of 6-paradol in formulation of 0.01% or 0.05%. BHT was presolubilised in ethanol at a concentration of 10% and subsequently added in formulation to reach a final concentration of 0.05%.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Fragrance ECLAT Additives/ 1 2 (BHT in 3 (6-paradol 4 (6-paradol 5 (6-paradol Trial (control) ethanol) in DPG) in DPG) in ethnaol) Solvent Ethanol Ethanol DPG DPG Ethanol Blend (%) 0.5% 0.1% 0.5% 0.5% [6]-paradol 0.01 0.05 0.05 (%) BHT (%) 0.05

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Fragrance FEROCE Additives/ 1 2 (BHT in 3 (6-paradol 4 (6-paradol 5 (6-paradol Trial (control) ethanol) in DPG) in DPG) in ethnaol) Solvent Ethanol Ethanol DPG DPG Ethanol Blend (%) 0.5% 0.1% 0.5% 0.5% [6]-paradol 0.01 0.05 0.05 (%) BHT (%) 0.05 EDTA (%) 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001

[0065] Visual and Olfactory Evaluations

[0066] All samples of EDT are put in different conditionsRT Dark, RT Light, 5 C. (fresh), 40 C. during three months and 50 C. during one month , and are evaluated each month. A Sun test (equipped with a Xenon lamp (1500 W) is also run for 16 hours. A visual assessment of the color is made each month for all conditions. The olfactory evaluation was performed for samples stored at 50 C. and at 40 C. and after Sun test.

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Evaluation scales I N C Fragrance impact Fragrance hedonic Fragrance color variation profile variation 5 = No change 5 = No change 5 = No change 4 = Slight change 4 = Slight change 4 = Slight change 3 = Noticeable change 3 = Noticeable change 3 = Noticeable change 2 = Significant change 2 = Significant change 2 = Significant change 1 = Extreme change 1 = Extreme change - 1 = Extreme change + = darker = lighter

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Results fragrance ECLAT The fragrance impact was not altered in the control samples (without antioxidant) in all conditions tested. The addition of antioxidant (6-paradol or BHT) showed no effect on the protection of the fragrance impact. Stability N Color C Without antioxidant 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 3 3+ 50 C. (1 month) 2 2+ 40 C. (3 months) 3 2+ RT Light (3 months) 4+ 0.05% BHT (in ethanol) 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 4 4+ 50 C. (1 month) 3 2+ 40 C. (3 months) 4 2+ RT Light (3 months) 5+ 0.05% 6-paradol (in ethanol) 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 4 3+ 50 C. (1 month) 4 2+ 40 C. (3 months) 4 2+ RT Light (3 months) 4 0.05% 6-paradol (in DPG) 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 4 3+ 50 C. (1 month) 4 2+ 40 C. (3 months) 4 2+ RT Light (3 months) 4 0.01% 6-paradol (in DPG) 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 4+ 3+ 50 C. (1 month) 4 2+ 40 C. (3 months) 4 2+ RT Light (3 months) 4

[0067] All additives increase the fragrance stability compared to control.

[0068] After 1 month at 50 C.: all concentrations of 6-paradol improve the fragrance stability compared to BHT and control (BHT improves it compared to control but less than 6-paradol).

[0069] After 3 months at 40 C.: All additives increase the fragrance stability compared to control.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Results fragrance FEROCE The fragrance impact was slighly altered in the control samples (without antioxidant) in all conditions tested. The addition of antioxidant (6-paradol or BHT) showed no effect on the protection of the fragrance impact. Stability N Color C Without additive 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 3 5+ 50 C. (1 month) 3 3+ 40 C. (3 months) 4 1+ RT Light (3 months) 3 0.05% BHT (in ethanol) + 0.001% EDTA 5 C. (3 months) 4 Sun test (16 h) 4 5+ 50 C. (1 month) 4 5 40 C. (3 months) 4 5+ RT Light (3 months) 4 0.05% [6]-paradol (in ethanol) + 0.001% EDTA 5 C. (3 months) 4 Sun test (16 h) 3 5+ 50 C. (1 month) 4 5+ 40 C. (3 months) 4+ 4+ RT Light (3 months) 3 0.05% [6]-paradol (in DPG) + 0.001% EDTA 5 C. (3 months) 5 Sun test (16 h) 3 5+ 50 C. (1 month) 4 5+ 40 C. (3 months) 4 4+ RT Light (3 months) 3 0.01% [6]-paradol (in DPG) + 0.001% EDTA 5 C. (3 months) 4 Sun test (16 h) 3+ 5 50 C. (1 month) 4 5+ 40 C. (3 months) 4+ 4+ RT Light (3 months) 3

[0070] After 1 month at 50 C.: increase of fragrance and color stabilities with all additives compared to control.

[0071] After 3 months at 5 C.: better color stability with 0.05% 6-paradol (blend in DPG), others additives are worse than control.

[0072] After 3 months at 40 C.: all additives protect the color of the fragrance, which is very altered for control.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Conclusion: Protection of odor - ECLAT 0.05% 0.05% 6- 0.05% 6- 0.01% 6- BHT (in paradol paradol paradol Conditions ethanol) (in ethanol) (in DPG) (in DPG) suntest Stability N + ++ ++ +++ (16 h) 40 C. Stability N + + + + 50 C. Stability N + ++ ++ ++ =: similar to control +: better than control : worse than control

[0073] [6]-paradol helps to stabilize the fragrance compared to control and gives in most conditions better results than BHT. A concentration of 0.01% of [6]-paradol in DPG seems to provide a better stability than other concentration at light. No improvement of the fragrance impact was observed with both antioxidants tested, [6]-paradol or BHT.

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Conclusion: Protection of color - FEROCE 0.05% 6- 0.05% 6- 0.01% 6- 0.05% paradol (in paradol paradol Conditions BHT ethanol) (in DPG) (in DPG) 5 C. = Suntest (16 h) = = = + 40 C. ++ + + + 50 C. ++ + + + =: similar to control +: better than control : worse than control

[0074] [6]-paradol helps to protect the fragrance color at high temperatures (40 C. and 50 C.), like BHT. 0.01% of [6]-paradol in DPG is the only additive that stabilizes the fragrance color after the Sun test. [6]-paradol had no effect to protect the EDT from light induced discoloration.

Example 2: Stabilization of Cleansing Compositions

[0075] Two studies have been launched to verify if [6]-paradol could be a replacement of BHT in bar soaps. We compared the efficacy of [6]-paradol and BHT on the oxidative rancidity, on the protection of the color, and on the protection of the fragrance and its discoloration.

[0076] Soap base 1 contains 80% of fats (including 1% of free fatty acids) and has a high moisture content (12%). It is known to be highly sensitivity to oxidative rancidity.

[0077] Soap base 2 contains 96% of fats (no free fatty acids) and has low moisture content (2%). It has shown low sensitivity to oxidative rancidity.

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Study of the oxidative rancidity Material name EU INCI A.01 A.02 A.03 A.04 D.01 D.02 D.03 D.04 Soap base 1 99.9 99.5 99.0 100.0 Soap base 2 SODIUM TALLOWATE 99.9 99.5 99.0 100.0 SODIUM COCOATE SODIUM PALM KERNELATE AQUA TITANIUM DIOXIDE BHT BUTYL HYDROXYTOLUENE 0.1 0.1 SymDecanox CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 HA TRIGLYCERIDE, HYDROXYMETHOXYPHENYL DECANONE Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Study of the protection of color Material name EU INCI B.01 B.02 B.03 B.04 E.01 E.02 E.03 E.04 Soap base 1 99.6 99.2 98.7 99.7 Soap base 2 SODIUM TALLOWATE 99.6 99.2 98.7 99.7 SODIUM COCOATE SODIUM PALM KERNELATE AQUA TITANIUM DIOXIDE Blue colorant AQUA 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 FD&C Blue 1 C.I. 42090 0.1% sol. BHT BUTYL HYDROXYTOLUENE 0.1 0.1 SymDecanox CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 HA TRIGLYCERIDE, HYDROXYMETHOXYPHENYL DECANONE Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

[0078] All samples of soaps are put in different conditions: 5 C. (used to as a control), RT Dark, RT Light, 40 C. during three months and at 50 C. during one month, and are evaluated each month. A crash test (CT, 5 cycles 50 C./room temperature/20 C.) and a sun test (ST) are also run. An Oxipress test is launched for all soaps. Oxipresss determines the oxidative resistance of oil and fat in all kinds of raw materials, semi-finished and finished products, such as food, animal feed, cosmetics and biodiesel. With Oxipresss it is possible to examine heterogeneous products. Therefore, it is not necessary to extract the fat and oil from the products prior to analysis. The sample can be placed in the reaction vessel without any preparation.

[0079] SymDecanox HA has a concentration of [6]-paradol of 1 wt.-%.

[0080] For the study of the oxidative rancidity a quantitative evaluation of the rancidity is made: the measure of the peroxide value. The peroxide value is a marker of the oxidative primary products. A colorimetric measurement of samples is also made each month.

[0081] For the study of the protection of color a colorimetric measurement of the samples is made each month. The equations for the colorimetric measurement results are as follows:

[00001]$.Math..Math.E_{\mathrm{ab}.Math..Math.\mathrm{vs}.Math..Math.t=0}^{*}=\sqrt{{\left(L_x^{*}-L_{t=0}^{*}\right)}^2+{\left(a_x^{*}-a_{t=0}^{*}\right)}^2+{\left(b_x^{*}-b_{t=0}^{*}\right)}^2}$$.Math..Math.E_{\mathrm{vs}.Math..Math.\mathrm{control}}^{*}=\sqrt{{\left(L_x^{*}-L_{\mathrm{control}}^{*}\right)}^2+{\left(a_x^{*}-a_{\mathrm{control}}^{*}\right)}^2+b_x^{*}+{\left(b_x^{*}-b_{\mathrm{control}}^{*}\right)}^2}$

[0082] Results of the Study of Oxidative Rancidity

[0083] Peroxide Value

[0084] FIGS. 1 and 2 show the results of Singapore and Soap base 2. It can be seen from Soap base 1 that 0.5% SymDecanox HA achieves good results after 2 months at light. FIG. 3 shows the results of the colorimetric measurement of Soap base 1. These results clearly show that SymDecanox HA has a positive impact at light and a better protection at high temperatures, whereas BHT causes more discoloration versus control. Regarding the crash test, 1% SymDecanox HA prevents the soap from discoloration. After sun test, it can be seen that both BHT and 1% SymDecanox HA have a negative impact and increase the discoloration versus control.

[0085] FIG. 4 shows the results of the colorimetric measurement of Soap base 2. As one can see, 1% SymDecanox HA is the more efficient antioxidant to prevent the discoloration both at light, at high temperatures as well after the crash test.

[0086] For the Oxipress test, soaps with 0.1% BHT vs soaps with 0.5% SymDecanox and soaps with 1% SymDecanox HA vs control soaps were launched.

TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Soap base 1 Pressure (bar) P.sub.1h P.sub.72h P.sub.72h-P.sub.1h A.01 - 0.1% BHT 6.26 6.22 0.04 A.02 - 0.5% SymDecanox HA 6.30 6.03 0.27 A.03 - 1% SymDecanox HA 6.04 6.08 0.04 A.04 - Control 6.09 5.84 0.25

TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 Soap base 2 Pressure (bar) P.sub.1h P.sub.48h P.sub.48h-P.sub.1h D.01 - 0.1% BHT 6.15 6.2 0 D.02 - 0.5% SymDecanox HA 6.19 6 0.2 D.03 - 1% SymDecanox HA 6.07 6.26 0.04 D.04 - Control 6.1 6.18 0.18

[0087] For both soap bases, the oxygen consumption is more important for soaps with 0.5% SymDecanox HA and control soaps in comparison with soaps with 0.1% BHT and 1% SymDecanox HA. That shows that both 0.1% BHT and 1% SymDecanox HA protects the soap from oxidation. FIG. 5 shows the results for Soap base 1; FIG. 6 shows the results for Soap base 2.

[0088] Results of the Study of the Protection of Color

[0089] FIG. 7 shows the result for Soap base 1; FIG. 8 shows the results of Soap base 2.

[0090] It can be seen from FIG. 7 that BHT has a negative impact on discoloration versus control after 3 months at 40 C. After one month at 50 C., BHT leads to a strong discoloration to the soap. Furthermore the addition of 1% SymDecanox HA clearly protects the soap from discoloration after 3 months at 40 C. 0.5% SymDecanox HA also has a positive impact, whereas BHT leads to more discoloration than the control soap.

[0091] It can be seen from FIG. 8 that SymDecanox HA prevents the discoloration of the soap at high temperature and that this effect is dose-dependent. It has a better efficacy than BHT and control. At high temperatures, BHT does not protect the soap and gives same results than control. Both BHT and SymDecanox HA have a small impact versus control at light.

[0092] For the Oxipress test, soaps with 0.1% BHT vs soaps with 0.5% SymDecanox and soaps with 1% SymDecanox HA vs control soaps were launched.

TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 Soap base 1 Pressure (bar) P.sub.1h P.sub.72h P.sub.72h-P.sub.1h B.01 - 0.1% BHT 6.19 6.2 0.01 B.02 - 0.5% SymDecanox HA 6.23 6 0.23 B.03 - 1% SymDecanox HA 6.28 6.26 0.02 B.04 - Control 6.31 6.18 0.13

TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 Soap base 2 Pressure (bar) P.sub.1h P.sub.25h P.sub.25h-P.sub.1h E.01 - 0.1% BHT 6.27 6.25 0.02 E.02 - 0.5% SymDecanox HA 6.24 6.12 0.12 E.03 - 1% SymDecanox HA 6.21 6.2 0.01 E.04 - Control 6.3 6.22 0.08

[0093] FIG. 9 shows the results for Soap base 1; FIG. 10 shows the results for Soap base 2.

TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 Conclusion: Protection of of soaps from oxidation and discoloration Type of Soap Test 0.1% 0.5% 1% soap name (duration) Conditions BHT SymDecanox SymDecanox Uncolored Soap Color L.a.b RT Light ++ + + unperfumed base 1 (3 months) 40-50 C. = = soaps Oxipresss RT Dark ++ = ++ (72 h) Soap Color L.a.b Light = + + base 2 (3 months) 40-50 C. = = Oxipresss RT Dark ++ = ++ (72 h) Colored Soap Color L.a.b RT Light ++ + = unperfumed base 1 (3 months) 40-50 C. + ++ soaps Oxipresss RT Dark ++ = ++ (72 h) Soap Color L.a.b Light + + + base 2 (3 months) 40-50 C. = + ++ Oxipresss RT Dark ++ = ++ (72 h) +: better than control =: similar to control : worse than control