PEPTIDES 69
younger, longevity seeking consumers. With this focus point, ‘collagen banking’ was identified as the defining factor in the selection of candidates for testing. Collagen banking refers to the concept of building up skin’s healthy collagen before the signs of ageing appear. Centella asiatica was selected as the species
of choice for collagen banking due to its history of wound healing, collagen stimulation and anti-inflammatory performance.6
After a review
of the relevant research, the team hypothesized that exosomes derived from stem cells of Centella asiatica would contain the most relevant compounds given their function in several tissue growth-related areas. Gene expression studies were performed to
screen several natural peptide candidates for potential collagen-banking benefits. Connective Tissue Growth Factor (CTGF) and Lysyl Oxidase Homolog 2 (LOXL2) were selected as differentiating genetic markers due to their roles in stimulating the production and assembly of extracellular matrix (ECM) components. The results of the screening showed that
a blend of natural peptides derived from the mushroom species Ganoderma lucidum – hereafter, the natural peptide blend - provided a statistically significant increase in the expression of both CTGF and LOXL2. Making this peptide an ideal candidate to partner with the selected exosome.
In vitro proof of concept Upon identification of active principles, an in vitro assessment of the relative activity on Procollagen Type 1 production in human skin fibroblasts was performed as a proof-of-concept screen. The exosome and natural peptide blend collagen banking potential was compared to that of a commercially available synthetic peptide benchmark via immunofluorescent labelling. The exosome and natural peptide blend at
Day 0
Procollagen Type 1 Stimulation *
60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00
-52.52% 37.19% * Exosome Peptide Blend ■ Synthetic Peptide Benchmark ■
1.0 mg/mL
Figure 1: The exosome and natural peptide blend provided a higher, statistically significant increase in Type I procollagen at 1.00 mg/mL concentration level
1.00 mg/mL concentration provided a statistically significant improvement in Procollagen Type I 52.52% (*p<0.05) versus baseline control) in human skin fibroblasts. The synthetic peptide benchmark provided a directional increase in Type I procollagen labelling of 37.19% at 1.00 mg/mL concentration (Figure 1).
In vivo confirmation of benefits With the in vitro proof of concept screen demonstrating positive results as compared to a relevant synthetic benchmark, the testing program progressed to an assessment of performance on human subjects. Simple formulations including: 1) placebo
control; 2) 2% weight-by-weight of the exosome and natural peptide blend; and 3) 3% weight-by- weight synthetic peptide benchmark were applied twice daily. The following parameters were measured:
Dermal density assessed by the Ultrascan UC22 cosmetic equipment (Courage & Khazaka, Germany), skin firmness assessed by Cutometry,
Day 28
appearance of expression lines and wrinkles assessed by high-resolution digital camera Primos CR (Canfield®). Measurements were taken after 28, 56, and 84 days of use.
Dermal density Dermal density can be measured by echogenicity of the dermis. Results are obtained through capture of ultrasound images as higher density regions of the skin present as brighter green colour on the scan. These regions are quantified with software for dermal density percent change (Figure 2). Dermal density study results for placebo
formula group after 84 days in-home use study showed no significant improvement. The group that applied the simple formulation containing the exosome and natural peptide blend showed significant increase in dermal density by 16.4% (*p<0.05), 28.1% (*p<0.05) and 33.6% (*p<0.05) compared to baseline control after 28, 56 and 84 days use respectively (Figure 3). The group that applied the simple formulation
Day 56 Day 84
Placebo
Exsome and
Natural Peptide Blend
3% Synthetic Peptide
Benchmark
Figure 2: Clinical study ultrasound images capturing dermal region during Day 0, 25, 56 and 84 measurements for placebo, the exosome and natural peptide blend and the synthetic peptide benchmark containing groups are shown
www.personalcaremagazine.com October 2026 PERSONAL CARE MAGAZINE
Pecrent Change
vs.Basal Control
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132
