A Comparative Analysis of 8 Facial Cleansers Using Corneosurfametry Reveals Differentiated Irritation Potential.

Authors

Sindhu Garimella, Thu Q Nguyen, Christine Emesiani, Matthew Meckfessel

Published in

Journal of drugs in dermatology : JDD. Volume 25. Issue 7. Pages 655-658. Jul 01, 2026.

Abstract

Facial cleansers can disrupt the stratum corneum and cause irritation. Selecting a cleanser that is both effective and gentle is foundational to a tailored skincare routine, particularly for individuals with sensitive skin. This project assessed the relative mildness of Cetaphil® Gentle Skin Cleanser (GSC; Galderma Laboratories, LP, Fort Worth, TX) vs 7 other commercially available gentle cleansers using corneosurfametry.
Surface skin cells were collected from the volar forearms of 18 volunteer participants using D‑Squame® standard sampling discs. Discs were then incubated for 10 minutes in a 10% aqueous solution of one of the 8 cleansers, 5% sodium lauryl sulfate (positive control), or water (negative control). Samples were stained with toluidine blue–basic fuchsin and measured by chromameter. Colorimetric index of mildness (CIM) least-squares means were compared pairwise versus GSC, and photographs provided qualitative corroboration. A higher CIM indicated a milder cleanser, while a lower CIM indicated a harsher cleanser.
The mean CIM for GSC was 63.87; pairwise comparisons indicated statistically significant differences between GSC and the mean CIM of the 7 comparators, which ranged from 46.95 to 53.32. Photographic tape appearance was concordant with CIM rankings.
GSC was significantly milder than the comparator cleansers as assessed by CIM and photographic analysis of the tape strips. These data suggest that there are differences in irritation potential among commercially available facial cleansers, which may help ensure patients and providers select a sufficiently mild cleanser for those with sensitive skin.

PMID:
42406355
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 06 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.