News

FDA Proposes UVA Rating on Sunscreen Labels


 

A rating system that would use stars on the label of a sunscreen to indicate the degree of ultraviolet A protection provided by the product is among the main elements of a long-awaited Food and Drug Administration proposed regulation on sunscreen labeling.

Other main features of the proposed regulation include the requirement that a bolded warning be placed in the “Drug Facts” box that ultraviolet sun exposure “increases the risk of skin cancer, premature skin aging, and other skin damage,” and that it is important to reduce ultraviolet exposure “by limiting time in the sun, wearing protective clothing, and using a sunscreen.”

The proposed UVA rating would be based on a standard testing protocol using an in vivo and an in vitro test. The maximum sun protection factor (SPF) claim allowed would also be increased from SPF 30+ to SPF 50+.

The proposed rule amends the 1999 rule that addressed UVB testing and labeling requirements for sunscreen products, which was stayed to allow the agency to address testing and labeling requirements for the UVA protection provided by sunscreen products, according to the FDA.

The FDA proposal “identifies how to label sunscreens so that consumers can clearly understand the level of UVA and UVB protection sunscreens provide and to understand the importance of protecting themselves from both types of UV light,” Matthew R. Holman, Ph.D., a senior scientific reviewer in the FDA's Office of Nonprescription Products (ONP), said during a teleconference held on Aug. 23. The proposed label “would help consumers quickly and easily identify the level of UVA protection a sunscreen product offers,” with the term UVA clearly labeled on the package, followed by one to four stars, corresponding to low, medium, high or highest UVA protection. This rating will appear in equally prominent print to the UVB rating.

“Until now, much of the focus has been on reducing the exposure of UVB light while we worked to understand the science of assessing the effects of UVA light,” said Dr. Douglas Throckmorton, deputy director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER).

Determining how to accurately measure UVA protection has been challenging because there are no internationally accepted standards for evaluating the effectiveness of a sunscreen that protects against UVA, and there are about 12 different tests. The standardized testing protocol proposed by the FDA is based on the agency's analyses of data and information on available testing methods.

The changes would likely not appear until 2009 at the earliest, considering the 90-day comment period following the announcement, the time the FDA will take to consider comments and finalize the rule, and the time manufacturers would take to comply with the requirements.

The American Academy of Dermatology has been waiting for the FDA to propose rules about UVA in sunscreen since 1999.

“We think this will be an excellent way for consumers to evaluate sunscreen products,” said Dr. Diane Baker, president of the American Academy of Dermatology. The four-star system is “simple and easy to understand, and they are making an excellent effort to educate the public about the difference between UVA and UVB,” which has been confusing for consumers, she added.

Both Dr. Baker, who is in private practice in Portland, Ore., and Dr. Henry Lim, chair of dermatology at Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, and chair of the Academy's council of science and research, commended the proposal to add the sun alert statement that emphasizes the risk of sun exposure, the importance of wearing protective clothing and limiting sun exposure, in addition to using sunscreen.

This is a “very reasonable proposal” to address UVA protection, in addition to UVB protection in sunscreens, Dr. Lim said in an interview. While the recommendations are long overdue, the issue of UVA protection is complex, so it took time for the FDA to come up with the final recommendations of the specific in vitro and in vivo methods.

This proposal is a “long time coming and … is a welcome step forward,” said Dr. Allan Halpern, chief of the dermatology service at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Using both an in vivo and an in vitro test to assess UVA protection “will hopefully address concerns raised about each test,” added Dr. Halpern.

He expressed hope that responses during the comment period won't slow down the process of implementing the regulations. He added that capping the SPF at 50+ is an improvement, but was concerned that this might be a disincentive for the manufacturing of ultrahigh SPF sunscreens.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Phase III Trial Activity for Melanoma Is Robust
MDedge Family Medicine
Safety of Solaraze for Actinic Keratosis Confirmed
MDedge Family Medicine
Mortality Risk 50% Higher With Severe Psoriasis
MDedge Family Medicine
Pearls Help in Treatment of Teen Atopic Dermatitis
MDedge Family Medicine
Skin Diseases Get Misdiagnosed in Primary Care
MDedge Family Medicine
Leafy Vegetables, NSAIDs May Prevent Recurrent Skin Cancer
MDedge Family Medicine
Five Factors Help Guide Nail Streak Management
MDedge Family Medicine
Weight Gain Is a Strong Risk Factor for Psoriasis
MDedge Family Medicine
Which technique for removing nevi is least scarring?
MDedge Family Medicine
Confluent annular lesion on the dorsum of the hand
MDedge Family Medicine