Increasing evidence on the impact of the different wavelengths of sunlight on the skin demonstrates the need for tailored recommendations of sunscreen according to skin phototype and dermatoses, which is now possible due to advances in the filters and formulations of sunscreens. A selective literature search was performed by an international expert panel, focusing on the type of sunscreen to recommend for photoaging, skin cancers, photodermatoses, pigmentary disorders and skin inflammatory disorders. Protection against ultraviolet (UV)B is especially important for light skin as there is a high risk of sunburn, DNA damage and skin cancers. Darker skin may be naturally better protected against UVB but is more prone to hyperpigmentation induced by visible light (VL) and UVA. Protection against UVA, VL and infrared A can be helpful for all skin phototypes as they penetrate deeply and cause photoaging. Long-wave UVA1 plays a critical role in pigmentation, photoaging, skin cancer, DNA damage and photodermatoses. Adapting the formulation and texture of the sunscreen to the type of skin and dermatoses is also essential. Practical recommendations on the type of sunscreen to prescribe are provided to support the clinician in daily practice.

© 2021 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.

BACKGROUND

Global concern about vitamin D deficiency has fuelled debates on photoprotection and the importance of solar exposure to meet vitamin D requirements.

OBJECTIVES

To review the published evidence to reach a consensus on the influence of photoprotection by sunscreens on vitamin D status, considering other relevant factors.

METHODS

An international panel of 13 experts in endocrinology, dermatology, photobiology, epidemiology and biological anthropology reviewed the literature prior to a 1-day meeting in June 2017, during which the evidence was discussed. Methods of assessment and determining factors of vitamin D status, and public health perspectives were examined and consequences of sun exposure and the effects of photoprotection were assessed.

RESULTS

A serum level of ≥ 50 nmol L-1 25(OH)D is a target for all individuals. Broad-spectrum sunscreens that prevent erythema are unlikely to compromise vitamin D status in healthy populations. Vitamin D screening should be restricted to those at risk of hypovitaminosis, such as patients with photosensitivity disorders, who require rigorous photoprotection. Screening and supplementation are advised for this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Sunscreen use for daily and recreational photoprotection does not compromise vitamin D synthesis, even when applied under optimal conditions. What's already known about this topic? Knowledge of the relationship between solar exposure behaviour, sunscreen use and vitamin D is important for public health but there is confusion about optimal vitamin D status and the safest way to achieve this. Practical recommendations on the potential impact of daily and/or recreational sunscreens on vitamin D status are lacking for healthy people. What does this study add? Judicious use of daily broad-spectrum sunscreens with high ultraviolet (UV) A protection will not compromise vitamin D status in healthy people. However, photoprotection strategies for patients with photosensitivity disorders that include high sun-protection factor sunscreens with high UVA protection, along with protective clothing and shade-seeking behaviour are likely to compromise vitamin D status. Screening for vitamin D status and supplementation are recommended in patients with photosensitivity disorders.

© 2019 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.

Skin cancer continues to increase in incidence year-on-year and represents the most common form of cancer across the globe. Every human undergoes premature ageing, particularly on the face, neck and hands. Both phenomena are driven primarily by chronic, daily exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR). While sunscreen products play a primary role in the prevention of UVR skin damage, the active ingredients, i.e., UVR filters, are facing unprecedented challenges in the coming 10 years and their future is by no means certain. This article, therefore, reviews afresh the facts around photoprotection and the role of sunscreen products in the prevention of acute (sunburn) and chronic (cancer, photoageing) skin damage and compares/contrasts these with various emerging questions and opinions around UVR filter technology. We present a passionate defence of this remarkable technology, but also attempt to imagine a world without it.

© 2023 Procter & Gamble. International Journal of Cosmetic Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Cosmetic Scientists and Societe Francaise de Cosmetologie.

Background: Skin cancer is the most common malignancy worldwide. Although photoprotection is the cornerstone of skin cancer prevention, evidence regarding the role of other radiations different from the ultraviolet radiation and the efficacy of sunscreens, oral supplements, DNA-repair enzymes, and antioxidants continues to evolve. Objectives: To review the current evidence on photoprotective strategies and assess their role in preventing actinic keratoses (AK), keratinocyte carcinomas and melanoma. Methods: A narrative review of the literature was conducted using PubMed (2010-2025), including studies in English and Spanish. Search terms comprised "photoprotection," "sunscreen," "oral photoprotection," "skin cancer," "melanoma," "keratinocyte cancer," "UV radiation," "non-melanoma skin cancer" and related concepts. Articles were selected for clinical relevance. Results: Daily sunscreen use significantly reduces AK and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in high-risk individuals, although evidence for basal cell carcinoma and melanoma prevention remains heterogeneous. Balanced broad-spectrum protection, including UVA and visible light filtering, seems to be important, whereas high-energy visible light needs further investigation. DNA-repair enzymes have shown reductions in cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers and clinical improvement of AK. Antioxidants such as Polypodium leucotomos extract, topical and oral, exhibit preventive effects on actinic damage and carcinogenesis. Topical and especially oral nicotinamide demonstrate chemopreventive potential in immunocompetent patients. Vulnerable populations-including transplant recipients, XP patients, individuals with albinism, and outdoor workers-require tailored photoprotection strategies with demonstrated benefit. Conclusions: Photoprotection extends far beyond UV filters, encompassing biological ingredients, antioxidants, oral supplements, and broad-spectrum strategies that target the full exposome. Comprehensive, behaviour-based photoprotection programmes are essential for high-risk groups.