Matrixyl vs. Matrixyl 3000 / alternative to retinol & Vi
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skin Care and Makeup Forum

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:56 pm

I recieved an e-mail from a day Spa in New York state called Barefoot in the Spa Inc. Martine, the owner asked what was the difference between Matrixyl and Matrixyl 3000? Since I have formulated with Matrixyl, I had this information. I thought this would be useful information for more of you who follow skin care regimes using the Matrixyls and/or retinol and/or vitamin C.

Matrixyl: This was the first peptide type, long term anti-wrinkle raw material, that Sederma produced. They worked in conjuction with L'Oreal to prove the efficacy of the material and to create cosmetic products designed around the peptide technology. L'Oreal saw the value in this raw material and took out a US Patent on it. They allowed Sederma to sell small amounts of the raw material to other cosmetic producers, but if large quantities were purchased, permission from L'Oreal had to be obtained first.

Matrixyl is described by Sederma as a revolutionary ingredient for the treatment of wrinkles and a remarkable alternative to retinol and vitamin C. This is a "long term" treatment rather than short term muscle freezing ingredient such as argireline, which only lasts hours at most. Matrixyl is a hydroglycolic solution containing 100 parts per million (ppm) of lipopeptide Pal-Lys-Thr-Thr-Lys-Ser (also known as Pal-KTTKS). The INCI name which must be placed on labels if Matrixyl is used is: Glycerin (and) Water (and) Butylene Glycol (and) Carbomer (and) Polysorbate 20 (and) Palmitoyl Pentapeptide-4

Matrixyl is characterized as helping to restore the matrix and epidermal-dermal junction to reduce wrinkles. The peptide of Matrixyl belongs to a family of molecules called Matrikines, and is an outstanding effective alternative to retinol and its esters for anti-wrinkle effect. In vitro testing on fibroblasts showed stimulation of the synthesis of callagen IV. It is non-irritating and without the toxicological concerns or negative side effects associated with retinol. The genes activated by Matrixyl in fibroblasts are consistent with wound healing mechanisms, but do not include the many pro-inflammatory reactions of retinol. The anti-wrinkle activity of Matrixyl is comparable to that of retinol and vitamin C, and can be incorporated into all skin care products globally - including sun car products.

Matrixyl 3000: This is a more recent peptide raw material marketed by Sederma. It is a synthetic pentapeptide (Palmitoyl-Lys-Thr-Thr-Lys-Ser) that mimics a fragment of Procollagen Type I by stimulating the matrix molecules (Collagen I, III, and IV Fibronectin) to reduce the appearance of wrinkles. This is a Matrikine combination that recreates conditions conducive to cell and matrix turnover. They act as cell messengers able to regulate the sequence of events required for skin repair (wound healing). To a degree, wrinkles may be considered localized defects due to deficient repair related to the aging of the cutaneous functions of tissue repair and turnover. Both Matrixyl and Matrixyl 3000 work in this way.

Matrixyl and Matrixyl 3000 may work in the same biochemical manner, but they are two very different peptide systems. Matrixyl 3000 is made from two new peptides that have nothing to do with the palmitoyl pentapeptide-4 that is in the original Matrixyl. The two new peptides are palmitoyl-tripeptide and palmitoyl-oligopeptide. There is some evidence that Matrixyl 3000 is more efficacious than the original Matrixyl at regulating cell activity. However, this data is limited and hasn't been backed up with further studies at this time.
Both of these "long-term" ingredient systems attempt to boost callagen production or repair DNA. These are mechanisms that I look for when formulating anti-wrinkle cosmetics and I far prefer them over skin irritating mechanisms. I personally formulate with Matrixyl for two reasons, I heard about that one first and liked the studies and data that came with the raw material. Also, since I make smaller quantities of products, I didn't have to worry about patent problems making use of the material very easy. Until I see further proof that Matrixyl 3000 is better than Matrixyl, I will keep using Matrixyl in my anti-wrinkle formulas.

Hope this information is useful to you.

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:24 pm

Very interesting! thanks. There are a few products that contain this indgredient that I will be adding the my regime after I finish Obagi. Neostrata (Canada) Wrinkle repair contains 5%, and Reversa Corrective Night Cream contains 3% Matrixyl

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:11 pm

Thanks for sharing John!

Matrixyl is indeed a very nice anti-wrinkle ingredient. I don't think I'd consider it an "alternative" to retinol though, as the topic name implies.

Would you mind sharing what you would consider an optimal percentage to use in formulations? I believe I read up to 10% somewhere, does that sound reasonable?

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:22 pm

Kassy_A wrote:

Matrixyl is indeed a very nice anti-wrinkle ingredient. I don't think I'd consider it an "alternative" to retinol though, as the topic name implies.

Exactly...there are way too many independent, time tested studies on why Vit A is absolutely essential to even consider trading it in for something far less proven.

I would prefer to add it as a "nice to have" active, as opposed to replacing an absolute requirement.

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:52 pm

I've really liked serums containing matrixyl and have seen long term results. I think it's one of the reasons why PSF cranberry eye gel works so well for me. Isomers also has matrixyl serums... whether they are at optimum % I don't know. I think they list them at 5 and 8% depending on the serum.

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 9:46 pm

John,
Are you suggesting we can add Matrixyl or matrixyl 3000 to our own moisturizers or sunscreen?

Quote: John............................
The anti-wrinkle activity of Matrixyl is comparable to that of retinol and vitamin C, and can be incorporated into all skin care products globally - including sun car products.

free skin care · Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:19 pm

Is it in LRP Hydraphase SPF30?

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:56 pm

I really don't think so. This ingredient is found mostly in high end night treatments. Usually if a product contains this, it will be clearly indicated, for marketing. Very Happy

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:01 pm

bethany wrote:

Kassy_A wrote:

Matrixyl is indeed a very nice anti-wrinkle ingredient. I don't think I'd consider it an "alternative" to retinol though, as the topic name implies.

Exactly...there are way too many independent, time tested studies on why Vit A is absolutely essential to even consider trading it in for something far less proven.

I would prefer to add it as a "nice to have" active, as opposed to replacing an absolute requirement.

Retinol is a tried and true anti-wrinkle active material. For those of you who like this regimen and can tolerate it, then by all means continue to use it. However, not everyone can tolerate the retinol regimen and may not like or want the potential skin irritation, redness, peeling, or sun sensitivity that can be associated with it's use.

It is those people that need to know that there is an alternative that is just as good as retinol and works in a completely different way.

I remember when I first started using Matrixyl in my formulation that I was made aware of a study done by Sederma on the effectiveness of Matrixyl versus retinol and vitamin C. So, I called up a cosmetic chemist friend of mine at Croda (Sederma) today, and he e-mailed over graphs and conclusions from those studies. The first one I have attached is Matrixyl versus a Placebo lotion in a 4 month clinical trial with two groups of 30 volunteers. The Matrixyl formula was loaded at 5%, the placebo had no anti-wrinkle active added.

The top graph is "evaluation of roughness"

The middle graph is "mean depth of the main wrinkles"

The bottom graph is "main wrinkle volume"

In each graph the first two bars represent 2 months into the study. The right two bars represent 4 months into the study. The bars go in a "downward" direction which means a "decrease" in either roughness, depth, and volume. The further "down" the bars go, the better the improvement in smoothness and wrinkle size and depth. Notice that the placebo bars either go up slightly, or barely have a downward direction.

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:07 pm

This study was a direct comparison of a cream with 3% Matrixyl versus a cream with 5% Vitamin C loadings. This was a 6 month study.

Once again, if the bars go in a "downward" direction, this translates to a decrease in:

1) Wrinkle Surface
2) Wrinkle Density
3) Skin Roughness
4) Wrinkle Volume
5) Wrinkle Depth

Left to right, the above categories are show with the blue bar representing the Matrixyl lotion, and the orange bar representing the Vitamin C lotion.

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:23 pm

Here is the direct comparison of a Matrixyl cream containing 3% Matrixyl, and a retinol cream containing 0.07% retinol. The creams were used daily for the first two months and twice daily for the next two months, by 16 volunteers.

The blue bars represent the Matrixyl cream results. The orange bars represent the retinol cream results. The "lighter color" represents 2 months data point, and the "darker color" represents 4 months data point.

In the top graphs the categories from left to right in the left two graphs are:

1) Main wrinkle depth
2) Main wrinkle length
3) Main wrinkle volume
4) Wrinkle surface

The graphs show that Matrixyl works quicker, showing more improvement in the first 2 months. After 4 months, the two treatments who very similar results.

The right two graphs show results in certain areas of the face. From left to right the bars represent:

1) Forehead
2) Periorbital (eye area)
3) Nasogenian grove (around the nose)

The graphs show that Matrixyl was just as effective as retinol in all areas accept for early on in the nose area, which was made up for in later use.

The "Echography" chart is a measure of increased skin thickness. This chart shows that Matrixyl is just as effective as the retinol treatment. However, the Matrixyl treatment worked faster, without any associated irritation.

Since I like to formulate cosmetics that are not irritating, this is why I chose to use Matrixyl.

I know these charts may be hard to see and read, so if anyone would like an attached larger copy in an e-mail, just send me a PM with your e-mail address and I'll send it over to you.

Finally....sister sweets, I wish I could say that you could get some Matrixyl and mix it into your own favorite cosmetics. But, I don't believe that Croda (Sederma) will sample or sell this ingredient to private individuals. The "quote" that you are referencing is aimed at cosmetic houses and cosmetic chemists, for them to incorporate into the formulas that they create.

Hope this helps, and also eliminates any confusion that may have popped up.

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:31 pm

The bars for the Vitamin C study go in the opposite direction. Its a little small for me to read. Did the Vit C 5% actually make the wrinkles worse? Confused

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:38 pm

NOTCH wrote:

Finally....sister sweets, I wish I could say that you could get some Matrixyl and mix it into your own favorite cosmetics. But, I don't believe that Croda (Sederma) will sample or sell this ingredient to private individuals. The "quote" that you are referencing is aimed at cosmetic houses and cosmetic chemists, for them to incorporate into the formulas that they create.

Cellbone used to carry the pure Matrixyl, haven't checked in a year though.

Skinactives.com has this alternative for personal formulators;

http://www.skinactives.com/product/detail.aspx?prodID=76

ETA: You lost me John, You went from comparing Matrixyl to Retinol, and now switched to Vitamin C.... Confused

I really don't think they are comparable.. Retinol and Ascorbic Acid work at the cellular level, but Matrixyl can't do that... Crying or Very sad

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:49 pm

amonavis wrote:

The bars for the Vitamin C study go in the opposite direction. Its a little small for me to read. Did the Vit C 5% actually make the wrinkles worse? Confused

Yes amonavis, that is what the data shows from this study. Now before anyone jumps and blames the Vitamin C for making the skin worse in this case, let's refer back to a recent "moisturizing lotion" study that was done in Sweden. Their study was able to prove that some creams and lotions not only do a poor job of moisturizing, but can actually dry the skin out further with continuous use. I don't know what the "base" lotion ingredients were in this study, but it is possible that the "other" ingredients may have been at least partly responsible for the negative results.

John

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:56 pm

Yeah it could be. But it also kind of confirms my suspicion that Vit C isnt always the wonderful ingredient that people think... I have heard a few worrying things about vit C oxidation, potentially causing more free radicals, and that topical Ascorbic Acid can actually cause a decrease in elastin. Not saying there arent some positive benefits as well depending on the formula. But at this time based on what I see, Im reluctant to spend hundreds of dollars on L-Ascorbic Acid products when there are other ingredients that are more stable.

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:07 pm

amonavis wrote:

Yeah it could be. But it also kind of confirms my suspicion that Vit C isnt always the wonderful ingredient that people think... I have heard a few worrying things about vit C oxidation, potentially causing more free radicals, and that topical Ascorbic Acid can actually cause a decrease in elastin. Not saying there arent some positive benefits as well depending on the formula. But at this time based on what I see, Im reluctant to spend hundreds of dollars on L-Ascorbic Acid products when there are other ingredients that are more stable.

You are absolutely, 100% right on about one point amonavis, and that is the instability of vitamin C. It degrades incredibly fast, especially in the presence of water, and most if not all creams and lotions, contain water. Raw material producers the world over have been trying to find a "stable" form of Vitamin C, or have tried to encapsulate it to protect it. So far, nobody has succeeded, and believe me, the company who can do that will Patent it and make a lot of money, because right now, it's not possible.

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:22 pm

Here's a quote from smartskincare.com regarding the *studies* in the above charts. Click link for full article.

http://www.smartskincare.com/treatments/topical/pentapeptide.html

Clinical studies of palmitoyl pentapeptide-4 do exist but all of them (to my knowledge as of the day of this writing) have been conducted or sponsored by the manufacturers (Sedema and Proctor & Gamble). This does not necessarily make the studies biased, but potential conflict of interests is always a red flag. Unfortunately, this situation is typical. Early studies of patented chemicals are almost always sponsored by manufacturers. It usually takes a long time before completely independent research is conducted.

John, it's hard to make out much on the chart regarding Vitamin C.... If you know, could you share if they used L-Ascorbic Acid and in what percent?

free skin care · Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:23 pm

Do you think its still worth adding in a vitamin C serum despite the oxidation factor? Since there are studies that suggest that vitamin C helps prevent sun damage. This Vitamin C subject always boggles my mind Laughing

.

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:19 am

amonavis wrote:

Do you think its still worth adding in a vitamin C serum despite the oxidation factor? Since there are studies that suggest that vitamin C helps prevent sun damage. This Vitamin C subject always boggles my mind Laughing

.

amonavis - it's no problem to find a stable vitamin C serum. SkinMedica Vitamin C Complex (in a polysilicone base) and CellularskinRX C+ are both very stable. It takes many months before they start oxidising. You can also buy small trial vials of SkinCeuticals vitamin C serums off Ebay. They are so small that you use them up before they start changing colour.

I cannot see a good reason for switching from retinoid products to matrixyl products. There are no independent studies showing the positive effects of matrixyl in skin care formulations, as pointed out in the article provided by Kassy_A. Retinoids are proven effective for anti-aging purposes.

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:28 am

Thanks for the tip! I really love retin A and credit it with my good skin. Although I have things about my skin I dont like, overall I know its good.

The reason I was considering adding another product was because I thought I could use Retin A every 2nd day and then use another product on the off days. I thought maybe that would allow my skin the benefit from another product as well, and give my skin a rest on the off days? Do you think that makes sense?

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:03 am

Kassy_A wrote:

Here's a quote from smartskincare.com regarding the *studies* in the above charts. Click link for full article.

http://www.smartskincare.com/treatments/topical/pentapeptide.html

Clinical studies of palmitoyl pentapeptide-4 do exist but all of them (to my knowledge as of the day of this writing) have been conducted or sponsored by the manufacturers (Sedema and Proctor & Gamble). This does not necessarily make the studies biased, but potential conflict of interests is always a red flag. Unfortunately, this situation is typical. Early studies of patented chemicals are almost always sponsored by manufacturers. It usually takes a long time before completely independent research is conducted.

The comment on SmartSkinCare doesn't deny that Matrixyl works, they simply state that they would like to see more studies. The raw material supplier I used to work for performed a clinical study on the "demo product" containing Matrixyl and Jojoba Esters that I created for them when I still worked for them in 2006. This company in no way was affiliated with Sederma or Proctor and Gamble. They simply wanted to know if the Jojoba Esters, which they produced, combined with Matrixyl, created a highly moisturizing anti-wrinkle treatment. The results were incredibly positive. Everyone of the the test subjects showed improvement in both moisturization, and wrinkle reduction. It was a completely independent, Dermatologist supervised, study that proved Matrixyl did work. As a matter of fact, the people in the study didn't want to stop using the product when the study concluded! Many of them continued to ask the company for the finished product, but since the company was not in the finished product business, they declined. UNFORTUNATELY....when I left to form my own cosmetic company, part of the "agreement" that I had to sign was the fact that I was not allowed to use any "proprietary" information from my old company. Since they were interested in protecting their jojoba ester technical information, I was not allowed to use any parts of the study including the before and after photos. I have been continuing to work with them to allow the use of this information, but still have been declined siting "proprietary" information. Sometimes, I really don't like the way corporations "work", and just have to accept that this is how the business operates.

John, it's hard to make out much on the chart regarding Vitamin C.... If you know, could you share if they used L-Ascorbic Acid and in what percent?

I know for sure that the Vitamin C load level was 5% but I'm not sure which type of Vitamin C they use. When I get a chance this week I'll give them a call back to try to find out.

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:12 am

Thanks John!... Please keep in mind that if it isn't L-Ascorbic Acid @ 15% the *study* is worthless in that regard!

If you find they used *anything* else, it should be clear to you and the rest of us, that they had ulterior motives.

Thanks for starting this thread, it's very interesting .. Smile

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:35 am

Thats a good point, I dont think that anyone believes that 5% ascorbic acid ever makes a big difference. Usually when people use a C serum its at 10-20%

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:24 pm

amonavis wrote:

Thats a good point, I dont think that anyone believes that 5% ascorbic acid ever makes a big difference. Usually when people use a C serum its at 10-20%

15% is optimal for L-Ascorbic Acid. If the study did not use that in their test, it's because they knew perfectly well it would work!

If you want the real lowdown, see if PubMed has anything...Their studies are completely unbiased, because they have nothing to sell.

free skin care · Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:24 pm

Interesting information. Hmmm now Im really doubting this ingredient. And the data on it seems skimpy at best.

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.