Next Article in Journal
Modified Midface Repositioning Using PLLA/PCL Barbed Threads: An Anatomically Guided Fixed-Anchorage Technical Report with Illustrative Cases
Previous Article in Journal
Cosmetic Efficacy and Sustainability of Beer and Brewing By-Products in Skin Care: A Formulation-Driven In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cosmetics
Volume 13
Issue 2
10.3390/cosmetics13020064
cosmetics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Dual-Purpose Body and Face Formulation with Synergistic Actives for Thin, Aging, and Dry Skin: A Four-Week Clinical Study

by
Remona Gopaul
* and
June Zhang
Research and Development, Gold Bond Co. LLC, 100 Morris St, Morristown, NJ 07960, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Cosmetics 2026, 13(2), 64; https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics13020064
Submission received: 7 January 2026 / Revised: 17 February 2026 / Accepted: 21 February 2026 / Published: 10 March 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Cosmetic Dermatology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Thin, dry skin is characterized by impaired barrier integrity, loss of dermal density, and accelerated aging driven by intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Biomimetic collagen peptides mimic native collagen sequences, stimulating fibroblasts to enhance synthesis while limiting matrix metalloproteinase-mediated degradation. This study evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of a multi-ingredient cosmetic product for thin, dry, aging skin, formulated as a dual-purpose body and face serum lotion containing 0.1% biomimetic collagen tripeptide (Tripeptide-29) along with Niacinamide, Citrullus lanatus fruit extract, and Selaginella lepidophylla extract. In this prospective, single-center study, 47 healthy women, aged 36–65 years with Fitzpatrick skin types I–IV, applied the formula twice daily to the face and body over four weeks. Objective measurements—including elasticity, wrinkle depth and volume, hydration, trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), and texture—were collected weekly alongside clinical grading and self-assessments. Significant improvements were observed across all parameters, with facial dryness decreasing immediately (−74.6%) and continuing to week 4 (−93.7%), hydration increasing up to 72.5%, softness improving up to 37.7%, roughness decreasing up to 37.9%, and TEWL reductions indicating strengthened barrier function. Desquamation improved by 75.5% by week 3, and no adverse effects occurred. The serum lotion demonstrated robust, well-tolerated benefits for enhancing multiple markers of thin, dry, aging skin.

1. Introduction

Thin, dry skin is a prevalent concern characterized by compromised barrier function and reduced dermal density, often resulting in discomfort, increased sensitivity, and a predisposition to accelerated aging [1,2]. Intrinsic factors such as hormonal changes and genetic predisposition, combined with extrinsic stressors such as environmental exposure and lifestyle habits, contribute to this condition [2,3]. Chronic dryness disrupts lipid organization and weakens the stratum corneum [1,4], while diminished dermal support reduces elasticity and firmness [5,6], creating a visible appearance of fragility and fine lines. Oxidative stress and inflammatory mediators further exacerbate these changes by degrading extracellular matrix components, particularly collagen, which is essential for maintaining the skin’s thickness and resilience [3,6].

1.1. The Science and Efficacy of Biomimetic Peptides for Thin, Dry Skin

Collagen is the primary structural protein in the dermis, responsible for its strength, elasticity, and water-binding capacity [5,6]. However, collagen synthesis declines with age and under conditions of chronic dryness, while enzymatic degradation accelerates due to increased matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) activity [6,7]. This imbalance leads to thinning of the dermis and impaired hydration [8], amplifying the cycle of dryness and fragility. To address these challenges, biomimetic peptides have emerged as innovative actives that replicate key amino acid sequences of collagen, signaling fibroblasts to stimulate collagen production and reduce MMP-mediated breakdown [9,10].
In response to the limitations of traditional moisturizing approaches, biomimetic peptides have emerged as innovative therapeutic agents that address the underlying molecular mechanisms of skin aging. Unlike conventional actives that primarily provide surface hydration or temporary plumping effects, biomimetic peptides are designed to replicate specific biological signals and trigger endogenous repair processes [9,10].
Tripeptide-29, a synthetic biomimetic peptide composed of glycine, proline, and hydroxyproline, exemplifies this advanced approach by mimicking the fundamental amino acid sequence of native collagen [11,12]. This molecular mimicry enables the peptide to function as a biological messenger, encouraging fibroblast activity and supporting extracellular matrix renewal [10,12]. Its low molecular weight facilitates effective penetration into the skin, reaching the dermal compartment where collagen remodeling occurs [11]. Research suggests that Tripeptide-29 enhances structural protein synthesis while also improving the skin’s firmness and elasticity, indirectly supporting better water retention and barrier function [11,12]. Unlike traditional actives that may irritate sensitive or dry skin, Tripeptide-29 offers a gentle yet targeted approach to reinforcing dermal integrity and mitigating visible signs of aging secondary to chronic dryness [10,12].

1.2. Multi-Mechanistic Formulation Strategy: Synergistic Functional Actives

Recognizing that skin aging and dryness involve multiple interconnected pathophysiological mechanisms, the present formulation adopts a comprehensive multi-active approach by combining Tripeptide-29 with complementary functional ingredients, each targeting distinct but overlapping aspects of skin health and extracellular matrix (ECM) degradation simultaneously, potentially yielding additive or synergistic benefits beyond those achievable with single-active formulations [9,10].
Niacinamide (vitamin B3 (1%)), the active amide form of vitamin B3, strengthens the skin’s protective barrier by promoting ceramide synthesis in the stratum corneum. This versatile ingredient provides anti-inflammatory benefits, reduces hyperpigmentation, and enhances collagen production while protecting against environmental damage [13,14,15,16,17].
Citrullus lanatus (watermelon) fruit extract (0.3%)—a rich source of amino acids, lycopene, and vitamins A and C—delivers potent antioxidant protection while supporting endogenous collagen synthesis. The extract’s natural anti-inflammatory properties help to soothe irritated skin and protect against environmental stressors [18,19,20,21,22].
Selaginella lepidophylla extract (2%)—derived from the “resurrection plant”, known for its remarkable desiccation tolerance—enhances the skin’s moisture retention capacity by regulating aquaporin expression and cellular water transport mechanisms and supports the skin’s natural repair processes [22,23,24].

1.3. Innovative Formulation Technology

Traditional skincare products are typically formulated for either facial or body application, requiring consumers to use multiple products to address aging concerns comprehensively. This study evaluates an oil-in-water emulsion for both the body and face that utilizes an innovative sensorial system incorporating high levels of glycerin, glycols, and polymers in a proprietary formulation designed for rapid absorption without residual greasiness or extended drying time [25,26,27,28].
This technological advancement enables effective delivery of active ingredients to both facial and body skin while providing an esthetically pleasing user experience that promotes adherence to treatment regimens. The formulation’s unique rheological properties allow for optimal spreading and penetration while maintaining the stability and efficacy of the incorporated active ingredients [25,26,27,28].

1.4. Study Rationale and Objectives

Given the complex, multifactorial nature of skin aging and the limitations of existing therapeutic approaches, there is a clear need for innovative formulations that can address multiple aging mechanisms simultaneously while providing comprehensive treatment for both facial and body skin. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel biomimetic collagen tripeptide-based serum lotion in improving key parameters of thin, dry, aging skin over a four-week treatment period.
The primary objectives were to assess improvements in skin hydration, barrier function, texture, elasticity, and visible signs of aging using validated objective measurement techniques, including Antera 3D imaging, Corneometer hydration assessment, Vapometer TEWL measurement, Cutometer elasticity evaluation, and Visioscan surface analysis. Secondary objectives included evaluation of participant-perceived benefits and assessment of product safety and tolerability.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Protocol

This single-center, prospective, before-and-after study was conducted over four weeks following established protocols for cosmetic clinical testing. The study design incorporated multiple assessment modalities to provide a comprehensive evaluation of skin parameters and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and good clinical practice guidelines.
Participants were instructed to apply the test product twice daily (morning and evening) to cleansed skin on both the face and entire body. The application protocol required participants to dispense a generous dime-sized amount from the 5 oz tube with a 0.0125 mm orifice opening, mix the product in their palms, and apply it uniformly to all treatment areas. All participants underwent a washout period before study initiation and were prohibited from using other skincare products during the study period.
The study protocol included multiple assessment timepoints: baseline measurements, immediate post-application evaluations (15 min ± 5 min), short-term assessments at 1, 24, 48, and 72 h post-initial application, and weekly evaluations at weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4. This comprehensive timeline enabled assessment of both the immediate and cumulative effects of the test formulation.

2.2. Participant Selection and Characteristics

A total of 47 healthy female participants were initially enrolled, with all subjects completing baseline assessments and 43 completing the full four-week study protocol. Participants were aged 36–65 years (with a requirement for age > 40 years) and presented with visible signs of dry and aging skin. The study population included participants with skin phototypes I (n = 3), II (n = 14), III (n = 18), and IV (n = 8), providing representation across different skin types and pigmentation levels.
Inclusion criteria:
  • Healthy female participants aged 36–65 years;
  • Presence of visible signs of dry and aging skin;
  • Ability to comply with the study protocol and restrictions;
  • Provision of written informed consent.
Exclusion criteria:
  • Diagnosed dermatological conditions (rosacea, eczema, acne, and psoriasis);
  • Pregnancy or breastfeeding status;
  • Recent cosmetic treatments (e.g., microneedling and chemical peels) within 6 months;
  • Prior use of botulinum toxin or dermal fillers;
  • Participation in other clinical studies (except patch testing);
  • Recent use of medications that could interfere with study outcomes;
  • Presence of skin conditions that could interfere with assessments;
  • Known allergies to cosmetic or topical products;
  • History of skin cancer or current cancer treatment;
  • Diabetes mellitus.
All participants provided written informed consent before enrollment, and the study protocol was reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) in accordance with Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 50 and 56.

2.3. Test Products and Formulation

The test product was provided by Gold Bond Co., Morristown, NJ, USA, and stored at room temperature as recommended. The formulation represents an oil-in-water emulsion designed for dual facial and body application.
Test product ingredients (INCI nomenclature).
Water, Glycerin, Isopropyl Palmitate, Cetyl Alcohol, Selaginella lepidophylla Extract, Dimethicone, Sorbitan Stearate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Niacinamide, Tripeptide-29 (Collagen Amino Acids), Palmitoyl Hexapeptide-12, Sodium Hyaluronate, Vitis Vinifera (Grape) Seed Oil, Squalene, Jojoba Oil/Macadamia Seed Oil Esters, Citrullus lanatus (Watermelon) Fruit Extract, Ceramide NG, Pyrus Malus (Apple) Fruit Extract, Lens Esculenta (Lentil) Fruit Extract, Bisabolol, Zingiber Officinale (Ginger) Root Extract, 3-O-Ethyl Ascorbic Acid, Tocopherol, Phytosteryl Macadamiate, Phytosterols, PEG-10 Phytosterol, Sodium Lactate, Sodium PCA, Tribehenin, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Hydroxyacetophenone, Caprylyl Glycol, Polyacrylate Crosspolymer-6, 1,2-Hexanediol, Disodium EDTA, Fragrance.
Cleanser ingredients (INCI nomenclature).
Sodium Cocoyl Isethionate, Stearic Acid, Sodium Tallowate, Water, Sodium Isethionate, Sodium Cocoate, Sodium Stearate, Glycerin, Sodium Chloride, PEG-20, Masking Fragrance, Petrolatum, Sodium Isostearoyl Lactylate, Sucrose Cocoate, Titanium Dioxide, Pentasodium Pentetate, Tetrasodium Etidronate. May also contain Sodium Palm Kernelate.

2.4. Objective Assessment Methods

2.4.1. Antera 3D Imaging System

The Antera 3D system (Miravex Ltd., Dublin, Ireland) employs multi-spectral imaging and computational analysis to reconstruct the three-dimensional skin surface topography and quantify spectrophotometric variables [29,30]. The handheld device uses reflected light from multiple directions and wavelength ranges, enabling precise quantification of wrinkles, texture, and volume parameters. For each assessment, standardized circular sub-areas (44 mm diameter) were selected within the measurement area (56 × 56 mm) using the Antera Pro software (version 3.1.12). Five sub-areas were imaged per participant, with three repeated measurements averaged per area and parameter. The system provides accuracy within ±5% error and has been validated for biophysical parameter assessment in clinical research applications [31].

2.4.2. Corneometer Assessment

Stratum corneum hydration was quantified using the Corneometer, which employs capacitance-based technology to detect changes in the dielectric constant of skin that correlate with water content. Measurements were performed on predefined anatomical sites (cheekbone and outer lower leg) under controlled environmental conditions. Three consecutive readings per site were averaged to minimize measurement variability. The Corneometer method has been validated for reliability and reproducibility in clinical settings [32,33,34].

2.4.3. Vapometer Measurement

Trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) was assessed using the Vapometer as an indicator of skin barrier integrity. The device calculates humidity increase over time, converting these data into TEWL values (g/m2/h) [35,36,37]. Measurements were performed on standardized anatomical sites under controlled conditions, with three consecutive readings averaged per site.

2.4.4. Cutometer Evaluation

Skin mechanical properties, including elasticity and firmness, were assessed using the Cutometer, which applies controlled negative pressure to draw skin into a probe aperture while an optical system records deformation patterns over time. Parameters such as immediate deformation (Ue), final deformation (Uf), and recovery (Ur) were calculated. Measurements were performed on standardized sites with three repetitions averaged per location. The Cutometer is widely validated for elasticity and firmness assessment [38,39,40,41].

2.4.5. Visioscan Analysis

Skin surface topography was evaluated using the Visioscan 20plus system, which employs standardized UV-A light imaging technology to capture high-resolution images of microrelief patterns. Surface parameters, including smoothness (SEsm), roughness (SEr), scaliness (SEsc), and wrinkles (SEw), were calculated using digital processing algorithms. Three separate images per site were captured and averaged to ensure reproducibility [42,43].

2.4.6. Clinical Grader Assessment

Trained clinical experts performed standardized evaluations of visible skin attributes, including texture, softness, and firmness, using validated scoring scales. Assessments were conducted under controlled lighting conditions, with multiple graders independently scoring each parameter. Mean scores were calculated for statistical analysis.

2.5. Subjective Assessment Methods

Participants completed structured questionnaires at multiple timepoints to capture self-perceived changes in skin attributes, product experience, and overall satisfaction. The questionnaire incorporated Likert-scale items and specific questions regarding sensory attributes (lightweight feel, greasiness, and absorption) and perceived skin benefits (hydration, smoothness, firmness, and wrinkle appearance).

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using both GraphPad Prism version 10.6.1 and the SAS 9.4 software. Two-tailed paired non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were employed to compare baseline and post-treatment measurements [44,45,46]. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, with a Bonferroni correction applied for multiple comparisons, establishing an adjusted significance threshold of 0.006 for eight comparisons [47,48,49,50,51,52,53]. For specific parameters—including tolerance grading, clinical assessments, and instrumentation measurements—paired t-tests were performed to compare post-treatment versus baseline values. The sample size determination was based on pragmatic considerations derived from previous similar studies and established protocols for demonstrating meaningful differences in the assessed parameters.

2.7. Ethical Considerations

This study was conducted in full compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and established good clinical practice guidelines [47,49]. The clinical study protocol, investigational product formulas, and informed consent forms were reviewed and approved by a US-based Institutional Review Board (IRB) before study initiation, in accordance with US FDA regulatory requirements (final opinion date: 5 July 2024) [48]. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants before enrollment. As this was a cosmetic study conducted on healthy volunteers with no therapeutic or diagnostic endpoints, no claims were made regarding disease treatment or prevention.

3. Results

3.1. Study Population and Completion Rates

A total of 47 participants were enrolled at baseline, with slight variations in sample sizes across different timepoints due to the comprehensive assessment protocol. Sample sizes were maintained as follows: N = 46 for immediate post-application assessments (15 ± 5 min), N = 46 for 1 h assessments, and N = 43 for subsequent visits, including 48 h, 72 h, and weeks 1–4. For Antera 3D measurements of the cheek and forehead regions, N = 42 at baseline and week 4, with N = 41 at intermediate timepoints (weeks 1–3). Two participants (Subjects #13 and #16) were discontinued from the data analysis, resulting in N = 41 for lower-leg skin texture assessments.

3.2. Three-Dimensional Imaging Analysis (Antera 3D)

3.2.1. Wrinkle Reduction

Antera 3D imaging revealed progressive reductions in wrinkle severity across both cheek and forehead regions over the four-week study period. Cheek wrinkle scores demonstrated continuous improvement from week 1 to week 4, with the greatest reduction observed at Week 4 (mean improvement: −32.7% from baseline; p < 0.05) (Figure 1). Similarly, forehead wrinkle scores showed consistent decreases across all timepoints, achieving a mean improvement of −20.5% by week 4 (p < 0.05) (Figure 2). These findings indicate significant wrinkle-reducing efficacy with sustained use of the test product.

3.2.2. Volumetric Enhancement

Volumetric measurements demonstrated positive changes across multiple anatomical sites. The upper outer thigh/buttock region exhibited progressive volume enhancement throughout this study, with the largest increase observed at week 4 (mean improvement: +30.8% from baseline; p < 0.05) (Figure 3). Cheek volume showed consistent enhancement, with the most pronounced effect detected at week 1 (mean improvement: +24.3%; p < 0.05), which was maintained through week 4 (Figure 4). Forehead volume similarly demonstrated early volumetric gains, with peak improvement at week 1 (mean improvement: +32.0%; p < 0.05) that persisted across subsequent weeks (Figure 5). These results suggest the test product provides meaningful volumetric benefits across diverse body regions.

3.3. Skin Hydration Assessment (Corneometer)

Corneometer measurements revealed hydration improvements across both facial and body sites. On the cheekbone, hydration levels increased immediately following product application (mean improvement: +72.5% at 15 min post-application; 100% of subjects demonstrated improvement; p < 0.0001). Although hydration gradually declined over subsequent timepoints, elevation above baseline persisted at 72 h (mean improvement: +26.8%; 86% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001) (Figure 6).
Similarly, the outer lower leg demonstrated hydration enhancement, with an initial mean improvement of +50.9% at 15 min post-application (100% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001). Hydration levels remained significantly elevated over 72 h (mean improvement: +18.0%; 95.3% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001) (Figure 7). These findings confirm the product’s capacity to deliver immediate and prolonged hydration benefits to both facial and body skin.

3.4. Skin Biomechanical Properties (Cutometer)

Cutometer assessments evaluated six biomechanical parameters (R0, R2, R4, R5, R6, and R7) related to skin elasticity, firmness, and viscoelastic behavior. On the cheekbone, parameter R6 (viscoelastic ratio) exhibited the most substantial improvement, increasing progressively to a mean value of 0.6541 mm by week 4. Statistical significance was achieved at weeks 1 and 4 for this parameter (p < 0.05), indicating a meaningful enhancement in skin elastic recovery and resilience (Figure 8).
The outer lower leg demonstrated more widespread biomechanical improvements. Parameters R5 (net elasticity) and R6 showed the largest increases by week 4 (mean values: 0.6199 mm and 0.6369 mm, respectively). Statistical significance was observed for R0 (immediate distension), R5, and R6 across multiple weeks (p < 0.05), reflecting improvements in skin firmness, elasticity, and overall mechanical integrity (Figure 9). These results provide objective evidence of enhanced skin biomechanical function following repeated product application.

3.5. Trans-Epidermal Water Loss (Vapometer)

Vapometer measurements assessed skin barrier function through trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) quantification. Both cheekbone and outer lower leg sites exhibited reductions in TEWL values from baseline, indicating improved barrier integrity. The cheekbone demonstrated its greatest reduction at week 1 (mean: 12.3 g/m2/h versus baseline: 14.2 g/m2/h), while the outer lower leg showed maximal improvement at week 3 (mean: 5.8 g/m2/h versus baseline: 7.7 g/m2/h).
Statistical significance was achieved across multiple weeks for both anatomical regions. The cheekbone showed improvements, with p-values ranging from p < 0.0001 to p = 0.0481, while the outer lower leg demonstrated significance from p = 0.0002 to p = 0.0296. These findings indicate that regular product use improves the skin barrier and reduces moisture loss across different body sites (Figure 10).

3.6. Skin Surface Topography (Visioscan)

Visioscan analysis evaluated three skin surface parameters on the outer lower leg: SEr (roughness), SEsc (scaliness/desquamation), and SEsm (smoothness). When expressed as mean percent change from baseline, SEsc demonstrated the most pronounced and consistent improvement over the four-week treatment period. Progressive reductions were observed, with peak improvement at week 3 (75.5%), corresponding to a substantial decrease in visible scaliness. Statistically significant improvements versus baseline were achieved at week 2 (p = 0.0002), week 3 (p < 0.0001), and week 4 (p = 0.0233).
SEsm showed its greatest improvement at week 3 (10.9%; p = 0.0150), indicating enhanced skin smoothness. Changes in SEr were variable across visits and did not reach statistical significance. Overall, the Visioscan findings demonstrate progressive improvement in skin surface condition, particularly in scaliness and smoothness, with maximal effects observed at week 3 (Figure 11).

3.7. Clinical Grader Assessment: Tactile Evaluation

Trained clinical graders assessed three tactile parameters—softness, texture/roughness, and firmness—on both facial and forearm skin. On the face, softness improvement increased progressively from 9.9% at week 1 to 36.8% at week 4, while texture/roughness improved from 11.6% to 35.9% over the same period. Firmness showed more gradual enhancement, increasing from 2.8% at week 1 to 18.0% at week 4. Statistical analysis revealed significant improvement for softness and texture/roughness at all timepoints (p < 0.0001), with firmness achieving significance from week 2 onward (Figure 12).
The volar forearm exhibited similar trends. Softness improved from 11.1% at week 1 to 37.7% at week 4, while texture/roughness increased from 12.4% to 37.9%. Firmness showed smaller but consistent gains, progressing from 5.4% to 19.0% by week 4. Significant improvements were confirmed for softness and texture/roughness at all timepoints (p < 0.0001), and for firmness from week 1 onward (p ≤ 0.0035) (Figure 13). These expert assessments corroborate the instrumental findings, confirming perceptible improvements in skin quality with sustained product use.

3.8. Subjective Assessment

3.8.1. Product Sensory Attributes

Participants reported highly favorable sensory perceptions immediately following application. At 15 min post-application, subjects agreed the product was lightweight (93.0%), non-greasy (90.7%), rapidly absorbed (90.7%), and easy to apply (95.3%). These positive attributes remained consistently high throughout the study period.

3.8.2. Immediate and Short-Term Benefits (15 Minutes–72 Hours)

Early skin benefits were evident within 15 min, with participants reporting healthier-looking skin (93.0%), enhanced hydration (93.0%), and improved smoothness (97.7%). Perceived firmness was lower initially (72.1%) but increased progressively.
By 24 h, hydration perception reached 100%, and healthy-looking skin increased to 97.7%. Smoothness remained high (95.3%), while firmness rose to 74.4%. Glow perception improved to 88.4%, and wrinkle reduction agreement increased from 46.5% to 72.1%.
At 72 h, hydration and healthy appearance remained above 95%, smoothness exceeded 90%, and firmness continued rising to 79.1%. Glow stabilized at 86.0%, and wrinkle reduction remained at 69.8%.

3.8.3. Long-Term Benefits (Weeks 1–4)

By week 1, hydration and smoothness both reached 100% agreement, with firmness at 88.4%. Glow perception was 83.7%, and wrinkle reduction improved to 76.7%. These positive trends persisted through week 4, with hydration consistently near 100%, smoothness above 93%, and firmness reaching 90.7%. Glow remained stable (88.4%), and wrinkle reduction peaked at 81.4%.

3.8.4. Key Trends

Immediate sensory satisfaction was complemented by progressive improvements in perceived skin benefits. Hydration and smoothness showed rapid onset with sustained high scores, while firmness, glow, and wrinkle reduction demonstrated time-dependent enhancement, indicating cumulative benefits with continued use that align with objective instrumental measurements.

4. Discussion

This study demonstrates the efficacy and tolerability of a novel multi-ingredient serum lotion containing 0.1% Tripeptide-29 biomimetic collagen peptide in addressing multiple signs of thin, dry, aging skin within four weeks. The formulation represents an innovative approach by combining a collagen-mimetic peptide with synergistic functional actives—niacinamide (1%), Citrullus lanatus fruit extract (0.3%), and Selaginella lepidophylla extract (2%)—in a dual-purpose emulsion suitable for both facial and body application [54,55,56]. This addresses a common limitation of traditional anti-aging products, which are typically formulated exclusively for either facial or body use [57].

4.1. Efficacy Across Multiple Skin Parameters

The test product demonstrated comprehensive improvements across objective and subjective measures. Hydration benefits were immediate and substantial, with a 72.5% improvement on the cheek and 50.9% on the outer leg at 15 min post-application (both p < 0.0001). Facial dryness showed a 74.6% immediate reduction (p = 0.0236), progressing to 93.7% by week 4. These findings align with previous research demonstrating that collagen-derived peptides enhance dermal matrix organization and barrier function [58,59,60].
Barrier integrity improvements were evidenced by TEWL reductions of 12.7% in both the cheekbone and outer leg by week 1 (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0002, respectively). Skin desquamation was at 5% by week 3 (p < 0.0001), while tactile assessments revealed significant enhancements in softness (36.8% and 37.7% on the face and forearm, respectively; p < 0.0001) and texture/roughness (35.9% and 37.9% on the face and forearm, respectively; p < 0.0001) by week 4 [61,62].
Progressive improvements in anti-aging parameters were observed, including wrinkle reduction (−32.7% and −20.5% on the cheek and forehead by week 4, respectively; p < 0.05) and volumetric enhancement (+30.8%, +24.3%, and +32.0% on the thigh/buttock, cheek, and forehead, respectively; p < 0.05). These findings suggest that biomimetic peptides may effectively signal collagen synthesis pathways while providing immediate hydration benefits, supporting a dual mechanism of action [63,64].

4.2. Tolerability and Sensory Attributes

No significant changes were observed in erythema, edema, or subjective tolerance parameters (tingling, burning, stinging, and itching) throughout the study period, indicating excellent tolerability [65]. This is particularly noteworthy given the formulation’s potent active ingredients, making it suitable for individuals with sensitivity who may experience irritation from traditional anti-aging actives [66,67].
The innovative sensorial emulsion system, utilizing high levels of glycerin, glycols, and polymers, enabled rapid absorption without greasiness or extended dry time. Over 90% of participants reported favorable sensory attributes, including a lightweight feel (93.0%), a non-greasy texture (90.7%), and quick absorption (90.7%). These immediate sensory benefits are essential for consumer adherence and long-term efficacy in anti-aging skincare routines.

4.3. Subjective Validation of Objective Findings

Self-assessment data strongly corroborated objective measurements, with progressive improvements in perceived benefits. Hydration perception reached 100% by 24 h and remained consistently high through week 4. By week 4, 90.7% of participants noted firmness improvement, and 81.4% perceived wrinkle reduction. This alignment between instrumental measurements and user perception suggests meaningful, clinically relevant improvements that translate into real-world satisfaction and continued product use [68].

4.4. Study Limitations and Future Directions

A primary limitation of this study is the absence of a vehicle, placebo, or active comparator group. While the significant improvements across multiple objective parameters strongly suggest product-related effects, natural variation, placebo responses, or seasonal influences cannot be definitively excluded [69,70]. This limits causal inference regarding the specific contribution of the biomimetic peptide versus other formulation components or environmental factors.
Additionally, the sample size (N = 47) varied across timepoints and was determined pragmatically rather than through formal power calculations [71]. The study population included only females aged 40–69 years, with representation across phototypes II–V but limited demographic diversity. Future investigations should employ randomized, placebo-controlled designs with larger, more diverse populations to enhance generalizability, establish dose–response relationships, and determine the specific contribution of Tripeptide-29 relative to the complete formulation [72,73]. Long-term studies extending beyond four weeks would also provide valuable insights into sustained efficacy and potential cumulative benefits [74,75,76,77].

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates that a novel multi-ingredient serum lotion containing 0.1% Tripeptide-29 biomimetic collagen delivers significant anti-aging benefits within four weeks. Key improvements include hydration (93.7% reduction in dryness), barrier function (12.7% TEWL improvement), texture (36.8% improvement), and desquamation (75.5% reduction), alongside visible wrinkle reduction and volumetric enhancement. The formulation showed a rapid onset (72.5% hydration improvement within 15 min) with sustained benefits lasting 72 h. Subjective assessments strongly validated the objective findings, with >90% satisfaction for sensory attributes and 81.4% perceiving wrinkle reduction by week 4. The multi-mechanistic cosmetic formulation, integrating biomimetic peptides with complementary synergistic actives in a dual-purpose face and body emulsion, offers an innovative approach to improving thin, dry, and aging skin.
Future randomized, controlled studies with larger populations will further validate these promising findings.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.G.; methodology, J.Z.; validation, R.G. and J.Z.; formal analysis, R.G.; data curation, J.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, R.G.; writing—review and editing, R.G.; visualization, R.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study protocol, investigational product formulas, and informed consent documents were reviewed and approved by the Advarra IRB (Approval No.: 2024-0788; Approval Date: 5 July 2024) prior to study initiation.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in this article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

During the preparation of this manuscript/study, the authors used Microsoft Copilot Version 2.20260101.44.0 for the purposes of reference citation. The authors have reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.

Conflicts of Interest

Remona Gopaul and June Zhang are employees of Gold Bond Co. LLC, the company that owns the cosmetic product evaluated in this study. All authors declare that the re-search was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Fluhr, J.W.; Moore, D.J.; Lane, M.E.; Lachmann, N.; Rawlings, A.V. Epidermal barrier function in dry, flaky and sensitive skin: A narrative review. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2023, 37, 669–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Baker, P.; Huang, C.; Radi, R.; Moll, S.B.; Jules, E.; Arbiser, J.L. Skin barrier function: The interplay of physical, chemical, and immunologic properties. Cells 2023, 12, 2745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Liu, H.; Dong, J.; Du, R.; Gao, Y.; Zhao, P. Collagen study advances for photoaging skin. Photodermatol. Photoimmunol. Photomed. 2023, 39, 495–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Rajkumar, J.; Chandan, N.; Lio, P.; Shi, V. The skin barrier and moisturization: Function, disruption, and mechanisms of repair. Skin Pharmacol. Physiol. 2023, 36, 174–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. He, T.; Fisher, G.J.; Kim, A.J.; Quan, T. Age-related changes in dermal collagen physical properties in human skin. PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0292791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Bar, O.; Valiukevičienė, S. Skin aging and type I collagen: A systematic review of intervention. Cosmetics 2025, 12, 129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Qin, Z.; Balimunkwe, R.M.; Quan, T. Age-related reduction of dermal fibroblast size upregulates multiple matrix metalloproteinases in aged human skin in vivo. Br. J. Dermatol. 2017, 177, 1337–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chavoshnejad, P.; Foroughi, A.H.; Dhandapani, N.; German, G.K.; Razavi, M.J. Effect of collagen degradation on the mechanical behavior and wrinkling of skin. Phys. Rev. E 2021, 104, 034406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, S.; Lian, F.; Feng, X.; Feng, M.; Niu, X.; Jiang, X.; Chen, W.; Bai, R. Promoting collagen synthesis: A viable strategy to combat skin ageing. J. Enzym. Inhib. Med. Chem. 2025, 40, 2488821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Waszkielewicz, A.M.; Mirosław, K. Peptides and their mechanisms of action in the skin. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 11495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Dierckx, S.; Patrizi, M.; Merino, M.; González, S.; Mullor, J.L.; Nergiz-Unal, R. Collagen peptides affect collagen synthesis and expression in human dermal fibroblasts. Front. Med. 2024, 11, 1397517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ghochikyan, A. Tripeptide-29|AC Collagen Prepeptide PF|Cosmetic Ingredients Guide. Cosmetic Ingredients Guide. 2025. Available online: https://ci.guide/peptides/tripeptide-29 (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  13. Rusic, D.; Ivic, M.; Slugan, A.; Leskur, D.; Modun, D.; Durdov, T.; Vukovic, D.; Bukic, J.; Bozic, J.; Perisin, A.S. Pilot study on cosmetic serum with niacinamide, postbiotics, and peptides. Life 2024, 14, 1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Tempark, T.; Shem, A.; Lueangarun, S. Efficacy of ceramides and niacinamide-containing moisturizer. J. Cosmet. Dermatol. 2024, 23, 295–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kumari, M.; Gupta, V.K.; Yadav, K.; Mishra, A. Niacinamide in dermatology: A multifunctional agent for anti-ageing. J. Med. Plants Stud. 2025, 13, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ong, R.R.; Goh, C.F. Niacinamide: Dermal delivery strategies and clinical evidence. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2024, 14, 3512–3548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yadav, E. Niacinamide and CoQ10: Molecular insights into skin health. Adv. Res. Dermatol. Cosmet. 2023, 2, 1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Caramori Cefali, L.; Figueiredo, M.C.; Ataide, J.A.; Tambourgi, E.B.; Mazzola, P.G. Development of emulsion containing watermelon extract for skin aging. J. Med. Plants Res. 2017, 11, 749–754. [Google Scholar]
  19. Yati, K.; Nugrahaeni, F.; Melinda, R.; Wati, L.R. Utilization of watermelon flesh extract as a topical antioxidant. Br. J. Pharm. 2024, 7, 147–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Adewale, A.A.; Alonge, O.T.; Adenaba, J.A. Nutritive values and antioxidant activity of Citrullus lanatus fruit extract. Food Nutr. Sci. 2015, 6, 1056–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kangralkar, Y.; Patil, S.; Shinde, S. Under-eye serum with Citrullus lanatus and Kojic acid. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. 2025, 3, 1882–1895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yobi, A.; Wone, B.W.; Xu, W.; Alexander, D.C.; Guo, L.; Ryals, J.A.; Oliver, M.J.; Cushman, J.C. Metabolomic profiling in Selaginella lepidophylla desiccation tolerance. Mol. Plant 2013, 6, 369–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Gunia-Krzyżak, A. Aquaporins in the skin: Molecular regulators of hydration. Cosmetics 2025, 12, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Boury-Jamot, M.; Daraspe, J.; Bonté, F.; Perrier, E.; Schnebert, S.; Dumas, M.; Verbavatz, J.-M. Skin aquaporins: Function in hydration and wound healing. In Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006; Volume 190, pp. 205–217. [Google Scholar]
  25. Patel, B.M.; Kuchekar, A.B.; Pawar, S.R. Emulgel approach to formulation development. Biosci. Biotechnol. Res. Asia 2021, 18, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pawar, C.V.; Jagtap, A.S.; Dhobale, S.M. Review on formulation and estimation of topical emulgel. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. 2024, 2, 602–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kute, S.B.; Saudagar, R.B. Emulsified gel: A novel approach for enhancement of topical drug delivery. J. Adv. Pharm. Technol. Res. 2013, 4, 368–376. Available online: https://japer.in/storage/models/article/LtN94qhIg7Gj5SwKlhMHjIK2IjbqScuetaJdVpVtqg4ei010RqPiQSn6Cqg0/emulsified-gel-a-novel-approach-for-delivery-of-hydrophobic-drugs-an-overview.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2026).
  28. Ojha, B.; Jain, V.K.; Gupta, S.S.; Talegaonkar, S.; Jain, K. Nanoemulgel for treatment of skin ailments. J. Polym. Res. 2021, 28, 214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Messaraa, C.; Metois, A.; Walsh, M.; Hurley, S.; Doyle, L.; Mansfield, A.; O’COnnor, C.; Mavon, A. Wrinkle and roughness measurement by the Antera 3D®. Ski. Res. Technol. 2018, 24, 359–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Xi, A.; Jiang, L.; Lu, Y.; He, C.; Li, L. Quantitative evaluation of sensitive skin by Antera 3D®. Skin Res. Technol. 2022, 28, e13213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Klonard, J.W.; Schlippe, G.; Voss, W. Stratum corneum hydration measured by Bluetooth Corneometer CM 825i. Skin Pharmacol. Physiol. 2024, 37, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Clarys, P.; Clijsen, R.; Taeymans, J.; Barel, A.O. Hydration measurements on skin: Comparison of instruments. Skin Res. Technol. 2011, 17, 316–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Park, J.H.; Choi, Y.; Jung, Y.J.; Lee, T.; Kim, H.; Cho, Y.; Lee, J.H. Skin hydration measurement: Comparison between devices and clinical evaluations. Ann. Dermatol. 2024, 36, 275–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Moretti Aiello, L.M.; Vergílio, M.M.; e Silva, S.A.M.; Leonardi, G.R. Operational parameters for Corneometry in clinical trials. Braz. J. Pharm. Sci. 2025, 61, e23182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Imhof, B.; Xiao, P.; Angelova-Fischer, I. TEWL measurement using closed-chamber methods. In Non-Invasive Diagnostic Techniques in Clinical Dermatology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 483–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. De Paepe, K.; Houben, E.; Adam, R.; Wiesemann, F.; Rogiers, V. Validation of the VapoMeter for TEWL measurement. Skin Res. Technol. 2005, 11, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fluhr, J.W.; Feingold, K.R.; Elias, P.M. TEWL reflects permeability barrier status. Exp. Dermatol. 2006, 15, 483–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Di Qu, D.; Seehra, G.P. Improving accuracy of skin elasticity measurement using Cutometer. J. Cosmet. Sci. 2016, 67, 37–44. [Google Scholar]
  39. Klimitz, F.J.; Neubauer, H.; Stolle, A.; Ripper, S.; Daeschler, S.C.; Aman, M.; Boecker, A.; Thomas, B.; Kneser, U.; Harhaus, L. Objective burn scar assessment using Cutometer. J. Burn. Care Res. 2022, 44, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Chen, D.; Yin, S.; Lu, X.; Fu, H.; Gao, H.; Zhang, S. Correlation between skin elasticity parameters and age. Cosmetics 2024, 11, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Neto, P.; Ferreira, M.; Bahia, F.; Costa, P. Improvement of methods for skin mechanical properties evaluation. Skin Res. Technol. 2013, 19, 405–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Stettler, H.; Crowther, J.; Boxshall, A.; Bielfeldt, S.; Lu, B.; de Salvo, R.; Trapp, S.; Blenkiron, P. Biophysical assessment of skin surface using Visioscan VC 20plus. Cosmetics 2022, 9, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Roessle, A.; Kerscher, M. Objectification of skin surface evenness using Visioscan. J. Cosmet. Dermatol. 2025, 24, e70383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Bland, J.M.; Altman, D.G. Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995, 310, 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mann, H.B.; Whitney, D.R. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann. Math. Stat. 1947, 18, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wilcoxon, F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biom. Bull. 1945, 1, 80–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013, 310, 2191–2194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Informed Consent Guidance for IRBs, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors; U.S. Food and Drug Administration: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2023. Available online: https://www.fda.gov/media/88915/download (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  49. Wen, B.; Zhang, G.; Zhan, C.; Chen, C.; Yi, H. 2024 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki: Key updates. Postgrad. Med. J. 2024, 101, 371–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. SAS Institute. JMP Documentation. In Statistical Methods for Paired Comparisons; SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USA, 2024; Available online: https://www.jmp.com/en/support/jmp-documentation (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  51. Dunn, O.J. Multiple comparisons using rank sums. Technometrics 1964, 6, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Armstrong, R.A. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2014, 34, 502–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Bonferroni, C. Teoria statistica delle classi e calcolo delle probabilità. Pubbl. R Ist. Super. Sci. Econ. E Commer. Firenze 1936, 8, 3–62. [Google Scholar]
  54. Zhang, C.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, M.; Fei, W.; Li, P. Oral supplementation with collagen tripeptide improves hydration, TEWL, firmness, and elasticity in 28 days. Am. J. Biomed. Sci. Res. 2024, 22, 002947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Tak, Y.J.; Shin, D.K.; Kim, A.H.; Kim, J.I.; Lee, Y.L.; Ko, H.-C.; Kim, Y.-W.; Lee, S.Y. Adjusting for climate, 1000 mg collagen tripeptide reduces TEWL and improves hydration by 12 weeks. Front. Med. 2021, 7, 608903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Schagen, S.K. Topical peptide treatments with effective anti-aging results. Cosmetics 2017, 4, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Resende, D.I.S.P.; Ferreira, M.S.; Sousa-Lobo, J.M.; Sousa, E.; Almeida, I.F. Usage of synthetic peptides in cosmetics for sensitive skin. Pharmaceuticals 2021, 14, 702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Nguyen, T.Q.; Zahr, A.S.; Kononov, T.; Ablon, G. Peptide serum is effective and well-tolerated in sensitive skin: Randomized double-blind trial. J. Clin. Aesthetic Dermatol. 2021, 14, 14–21. [Google Scholar]
  59. Bîrsan, M.; Gore, E.; Scripcariu, Ș.-I.; Vlad, R.-A.; Antonoaea, P.; Pintea, C.; Pintea, A.; Cotoi, C.-T.; Focșa, A.-V.; Ciurba, A. Multi-active cosmeceutical formulations: Stability, sensory performance, and tolerability. Cosmetics 2025, 12, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Konisky, H.; Bowe, W.P.; Kobets, K. Efficacy and tolerability of a retinal serum with peptides: 8-week study in 32 subjects (47% skin of color). J. Drugs Dermatol. 2024, 23, 992–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cymbiotics Biopharma. Autophagy-activating peptide improves barrier and reduces TEWL (9.7%) after 4 weeks in sensitive skin. Sci. Updates 2025, 12, 45–52. [Google Scholar]
  62. Umbrex. Product Texture and Sensory Evaluation. Available online: https://umbrex.com/resources/industry-analyses/how-to-analyze-a-cosmetics-company/product-texture-and-sensory-evaluation/ (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  63. Andrei, F. Sensory science in cosmetics: Link between texture and consumer satisfaction. In Cosmetic Industry—Trends, Products and Quality Control; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bareen, M.A.; Shagufta, R.; Fatima, S. Recent developments in sensory assessment and consumer preference techniques. In Engineering Solutions for Sustainable Production; FSES 613; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Clapham, D.; Belissa, E.; Inghelbrecht, S.; Pensé-Lhéritier, A.-M.; Ruiz, F.; Sheehan, L.; Shine, M.; Vallet, T.; Walsh, J.; Tuleu, C. Best practice in sensory analysis enhances compliance. Pharmaceutics 2023, 15, 2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Civille, G.V.; Dus, C. How sensory evaluation informs product development. Cosmet. Toilet. 2019, 120, 49–55. [Google Scholar]
  67. Higgins, K.M.; Levin, G. Considerations for Design and Analysis in Open-Label Trials; FDA/CDER Poster: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2022. Available online: https://www.fda.gov/media/168664/download (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  68. von Wernsdorf, M.; Loef, M.; Tuschen-Caffier, B.; Schmidt, S. Effects of open-label placebos: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 24238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Blease, C.R.; Bernstein, M.H.; Locher, C. Open-label placebo trials: Methodological considerations and recommendations. BMJ Evid.-Based Med. 2020, 25, 159–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. ClinicalStudies.in. Open-Label Studies: Design, Applications, and Best Practices in Clinical Research. 2025. Available online: https://www.clinicalstudies.in/open-label-studies-design-applications-and-best-practices-in-clinical-research (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  71. Mauri, L.; D’Agostino, R.B. Challenges in design and interpretation of noninferiority trials. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 377, 856–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Good Clinical Trials Collaborative. Design and Conduct of Rigorous RCTs. 2023. Available online: https://www.goodtrials.org (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  73. Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative. Increasing diversity in clinical trials: Recommendations. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 2023, 113, 489–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Panchal, H.; Trivedi, M. A comprehensive review of comparative effectiveness research: Methodologies, applications, and future directions. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. 2025, 3, 166–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Williams, S. Innovations in randomized trials: Exploring adaptive designs, digital integration and evolving methodologies. J. Clin. Trials 2024, 15, 586. Available online: https://www.longdom.org/open-access-pdfs/innovations-in-randomised-trials-exploring-adaptive-designs-digital-integration-and-evolving-methodologies.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  76. CognixPulse. Understanding Randomized Controlled Trials in Research. 2022. Available online: https://cognixpulse.com/articles/understanding-randomized-controlled-trials/ (accessed on 20 February 2026).
  77. FDAGuidelines.com. Real-World Evidence Strategies for Underrepresented Populations. 2025. Available online: https://www.fdaguidelines.com/rwe-strategies-for-subgroups-and-special-populations-underrepresented-in-rcts/ (accessed on 6 January 2026).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g001
Figure 1. A box plot illustrating the percentage improvement in cheek wrinkle score over weeks 1–4. Progressive reduction with maximum improvement in week 4 (−32.7%; p < 0.05).
Figure 1. A box plot illustrating the percentage improvement in cheek wrinkle score over weeks 1–4. Progressive reduction with maximum improvement in week 4 (−32.7%; p < 0.05).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g001
Cosmetics 13 00064 g002
Figure 2. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in forehead wrinkle scores over weeks 1–4. Consistent reductions with largest improvement in week 4 (−20.5%; p < 0.05).
Figure 2. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in forehead wrinkle scores over weeks 1–4. Consistent reductions with largest improvement in week 4 (−20.5%; p < 0.05).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g002
Cosmetics 13 00064 g003
Figure 3. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in upper outer thigh/buttock volume over weeks 1–4. Progressive enhancement with maximum improvement in week 4 (+30.8%; p < 0.05).
Figure 3. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in upper outer thigh/buttock volume over weeks 1–4. Progressive enhancement with maximum improvement in week 4 (+30.8%; p < 0.05).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g003
Cosmetics 13 00064 g004
Figure 4. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in cheek volume over weeks 1–4. Peak improvement at week 1 (+24.3%; p < 0.05) maintained through week 4.
Figure 4. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in cheek volume over weeks 1–4. Peak improvement at week 1 (+24.3%; p < 0.05) maintained through week 4.
Cosmetics 13 00064 g004
Cosmetics 13 00064 g005
Figure 5. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in forehead volume over weeks 1–4. Greatest improvement at week 1 (+32.0%; p < 0.05) with sustained enhancement.
Figure 5. A box plot showing the percentage improvement in forehead volume over weeks 1–4. Greatest improvement at week 1 (+32.0%; p < 0.05) with sustained enhancement.
Cosmetics 13 00064 g005
Cosmetics 13 00064 g006
Figure 6. A combined bar and line chart illustrating hydration improvement on the cheekbone from immediate to 72 h post-application. Peak effect at 15 min (+72.5%; 100% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001).
Figure 6. A combined bar and line chart illustrating hydration improvement on the cheekbone from immediate to 72 h post-application. Peak effect at 15 min (+72.5%; 100% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g006
Cosmetics 13 00064 g007
Figure 7. A combined bar and line chart illustrating hydration improvement on the outer lower leg from immediate to 72 h post-application, with a strong initial effect (+50.9%; 100% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001).
Figure 7. A combined bar and line chart illustrating hydration improvement on the outer lower leg from immediate to 72 h post-application, with a strong initial effect (+50.9%; 100% of subjects improved; p < 0.0001).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g007
Cosmetics 13 00064 g008
Figure 8. A grouped bar chart illustrating mean Cutometer measurements on the cheekbone across weeks 1–4. Notable R6 improvement by week 4 (0.6541 mm; p < 0.05 at weeks 1 and 4).
Figure 8. A grouped bar chart illustrating mean Cutometer measurements on the cheekbone across weeks 1–4. Notable R6 improvement by week 4 (0.6541 mm; p < 0.05 at weeks 1 and 4).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g008
Cosmetics 13 00064 g009
Figure 9. A grouped bar chart illustrating mean Cutometer measurements on the outer lower leg across weeks 1–4. Significant improvements in R0, R5, and R6 parameters (p < 0.05).
Figure 9. A grouped bar chart illustrating mean Cutometer measurements on the outer lower leg across weeks 1–4. Significant improvements in R0, R5, and R6 parameters (p < 0.05).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g009
Cosmetics 13 00064 g010
Figure 10. A line chart comparing mean Vapometer measurements (TEWL) of the cheekbone and the outer lower leg over weeks 1–4, demonstrating improved barrier function at both sites with statistical significance across multiple timepoints.
Figure 10. A line chart comparing mean Vapometer measurements (TEWL) of the cheekbone and the outer lower leg over weeks 1–4, demonstrating improved barrier function at both sites with statistical significance across multiple timepoints.
Cosmetics 13 00064 g010
Cosmetics 13 00064 g011
Figure 11. A grouped bar chart showing mean percent change from baseline in Visioscan parameters (SEr, SEsc, SEsm) measured on the outer lower leg over four weeks. SEsc demonstrated the greatest improvement, with peak effect at week 3. Statistically significant improvements versus baseline were observed for SEsc (weeks 2–4) and SEsm (week 3).
Figure 11. A grouped bar chart showing mean percent change from baseline in Visioscan parameters (SEr, SEsc, SEsm) measured on the outer lower leg over four weeks. SEsc demonstrated the greatest improvement, with peak effect at week 3. Statistically significant improvements versus baseline were observed for SEsc (weeks 2–4) and SEsm (week 3).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g011
Cosmetics 13 00064 g012
Figure 12. A grouped bar chart illustrating tactile improvements on the face over weeks 1–4, with progressive enhancement in softness (9.9% to 36.8%) and texture/roughness (11.6% to 35.9%; both p < 0.0001).
Figure 12. A grouped bar chart illustrating tactile improvements on the face over weeks 1–4, with progressive enhancement in softness (9.9% to 36.8%) and texture/roughness (11.6% to 35.9%; both p < 0.0001).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g012
Cosmetics 13 00064 g013
Figure 13. A grouped bar chart illustrating tactile improvements on the volar forearm over weeks 1–4, showing consistent gains in softness (11.1% to 37.7%) and texture/roughness (12.4% to 37.9%; both p < 0.0001).
Figure 13. A grouped bar chart illustrating tactile improvements on the volar forearm over weeks 1–4, showing consistent gains in softness (11.1% to 37.7%) and texture/roughness (12.4% to 37.9%; both p < 0.0001).
Cosmetics 13 00064 g013
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gopaul, R.; Zhang, J. Dual-Purpose Body and Face Formulation with Synergistic Actives for Thin, Aging, and Dry Skin: A Four-Week Clinical Study. Cosmetics 2026, 13, 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics13020064

AMA Style

Gopaul R, Zhang J. Dual-Purpose Body and Face Formulation with Synergistic Actives for Thin, Aging, and Dry Skin: A Four-Week Clinical Study. Cosmetics. 2026; 13(2):64. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics13020064

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gopaul, Remona, and June Zhang. 2026. "Dual-Purpose Body and Face Formulation with Synergistic Actives for Thin, Aging, and Dry Skin: A Four-Week Clinical Study" Cosmetics 13, no. 2: 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics13020064

APA Style

Gopaul, R., & Zhang, J. (2026). Dual-Purpose Body and Face Formulation with Synergistic Actives for Thin, Aging, and Dry Skin: A Four-Week Clinical Study. Cosmetics, 13(2), 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics13020064

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop