Content uploaded by Michael Anthonavage
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Michael Anthonavage on Oct 05, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Title: Effects of Oral Supplementation With OptiMSM® on Skin Health and Wrinkle Reduction
Subtitle: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical pilot study
Authors:
Michael Anthonavage^, Rodney Benjamin*, Eric Withee*
Abstract
Objective
The effects and perception of aging are directly reflected in the health and condition of the skin. Beauty and
antiaging products largely focus on treatment of the skin with an outside-in strategy. There is demand for
“beauty from within” products that support underlying internal processes necessary for healthy and vital skin.
This study assesses the effectiveness of methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) as an oral supplement on skin health
using expert grading, instrumental measurements, and participant self-evaluation.
Methods
An initial preclinical in vitro gene marker study evaluated the effects of 2.5% MSM solution on the expression
of 92 genes associated with skin function. The primary double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial
randomized 20 female participants to receive either 3 g per day of MSM or placebo over 16 weeks. Skin health
was evaluated through expert grading, instrumentation, and participant self-assessment at weeks 8 and 16.
Results
MSM regulates the genomic expression of key genes responsible for skin health and the prevention of aging.
Furthermore, MSM supplementation showed statistically significant improvements over placebo by expert
grading in crow’s feet and skin firmness, and statistically significant improvements from baseline in crow’s
feet, skin firmness, tone, and texture. Using photo instrumentation analysis, MSM supplementation produced
statistically significant improvements over placebo for wrinkle (crow’s feet) total count, length, severity, and
deep line counts and for wrinkles (global) total count, length, and severity. The product was well tolerated, and
overall, the MSM group gave more favorable self-assessment than the placebo group, though the improvement
was not statistically significant.
Conclusion
MSM supplementation appears to benefit skin health, primarily the reduction of fine lines and wrinkles. Effects
on gene expression may partially account for the benefits, but further research is needed to verify results and
mechanism of action.
Introduction
The skin is the largest organ of the body and serves several purposes in the lives of individuals. Functionally,
the skin provides a barrier from exogenous factors, maintains body temperature, and prevents water loss.
Socially and psychologically, the skin acts as an expression of aging and a determinant of physical appeal.1
Skin health is inextricably linked to both physical health outcomes like infection and hydration and to
psychological outcomes like anxiety and depression.2,3 Skin firmness and the size and number of wrinkles are
strongly associated with the perception of age, making skin the focus of many antiaging treatments.4 Hereditary
factors only account for approximately 3% of aging, and the skin is especially vulnerable to aging damage from
both endogenous and exogenous factors.5 Rapid cell production and turnover requires consistent and sufficient
nutrients for healthy growth and function. Environmental factors like toxins, free radicals, humidity, and
temperature can damage the structure and function of skin thus affecting its barrier properties. Internal factors
like stress, malnourishment, and inflammation can impair the skin’s growth, maintenance, and ability to combat
external factors.6-8
Traditionally, the approach to skin has been from the outside-in, through topical application and direct
treatments. Recently, there has been a strong interest in an inside-out approach using nutrition and
nutraceuticals to support skin function.9 There is a demand for “beauty from within” products that provide
support endogenously to reduce the effects of aging and damage. Termed nutricosmetics, these products
currently include antioxidants like polyphenols, phytonutrients, and vitamins C and E, as well as structural
components like hydrolyzed collagen and hyaluronan.10
Methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) is an organosulfur found in a variety of foods including milk, grains, fruits, and
vegetables.11Also known as dimethyl sulfone, it is associated with a variety of health claims including relief of
pain associated with osteoarthritis, allergic rhinitis, and inflammation.12-14 Previous MSM research indicates
that it may be a good candidate as a nutricosmetic by providing organic sulfur, reducing inflammation, and
supporting the body’s intrinsic antioxidant pathways.
Sulfur has long been associated with skin health because of its fundamental role in physiological processes,
including the synthesis of collagen, hyaluronic acid, and keratohyalin—the most abundant matrix molecules in
the skin.15-17 There is evidence that MSM sulfur can be incorporated into the sulfur-containing amino acids
methionine and cysteine to provide a source of dietary sulfur and MSM may affect the compartmentalization
and metabolism of sulfur.18 Inclusion of MSM in the sulfur pathways may provide, or possibly spare, sulfur-
based components necessary for the production and maintenance fundamental structures by preventing their
recycling and/or turnover rate. Overactive inflammatory responses and increased inflammation can damage
dermal cells and degrade structural matrices, leading to signs of aging.19 The antiinflammatory properties of
MSM may support skin health by decreasing damage done through inflammatory cascades. Studies have shown
that MSM can reduce the production of interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), nitric oxide
(NO), prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), and nuclear factor (NF)-κB.20,21 Additionally, oxidative stress is a major
contributor to cellular aging and is especially problematic in the skin, which is bombarded by free radicals from
both endogenous and exogenous sources.22 MSM supports the body’s natural antioxidant pathways through
increased levels of glutathione (GSH), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and catalase (CAT).23 MSM has been
shown to reduce levels of homocysteine, a molecule with damaging effects on collagen crosslinking.24
This study was conducted in 2 steps. A preclinical evaluation of the effects of MSM on gene expression in an
artificial 3-dimensional (3D) skin model conducted to inform the viability and direction of the clinical phase.
The purpose of the clinical evaluation was to examine the effects of oral MSM supplementation on skin health
and appearance of aging. We hypothesized that supplementation of MSM at 3 g per day would decrease visible
wrinkles, improve measurable skin function, and benefit participant self-assessment.
Materials/Methods
Preclinical Gene Marker Study
This portion of the study was performed by GeneMarkers, Kalamazoo, Michigan. In the study, 2.5%
OptiMSM® vs sterile water control was used to treat 3D skin cultures. Tissues were collected in the cell storage
regeant RNAlater (Qiagen, Venlo, the Netherlands) for gene expression analysis. Gene expression was analyzed
using validated TaqMan gene expression assays in the TaqMan low density array (TLDA) format. Analysis was
carried out using the GeneMarkers Standard Skin Panel, which contains assays for 92 target genes and 4
endogenous control genes. RNA was isolated from EFT-400 cultures using a Qiagen RNAeasy isolation kit
according to the manufacturer’s instructions for fibrous tissues. RNA concentration and purity were determined
using a NanoDrop 2000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Lafayette, Colorado). High-quality RNA was
isolated from all tissue samples, and cDNA was generated for each sample using a High-capacity cDNA
Reverse Transcription Kit (Applied Biosystems, Thermo Scientific, Lafayette, Colorado) according to the
manufacturer’s instructions. PCR reactions were run using a Life Technologies (Thermo Scientific, Lafayette,
Colorado) QuantStudio 12K Flex instrument and Life Technologies validated gene expression assays in a
TLDA format. Each gene was assayed in duplicate. Raw data generated with the QuantStudio 12K Flex
software was imported into RealTime StatMiner software (version 4.2, Integromics, Granada, Spain) for
statistical analysis using the relative quantitation (RQ) method. In the first step of an RQ analysis, the cycle
threshold (CT) value of the target gene is normalized to the CT value of an endogenous control gene for each
sample to generate the delta CT (dCT). The dCT values are calculated in order to normalize/control for
variability between the samples that may occur during the experimental procedures. Three algorithms were used
to determine the most stable endogenous control gene. Based on the stability scores of the 3 algorithms (the
coefficient of variability, normfinder algorithm, and minvarmed), glucuronidase-β (GUSB) was selected as the
most stable endogenous control gene. Statistics (tests) were carried out using dCT values normalized to GUSB.
Statistically significant changes in gene expression (P<0.05, N=4) are reported.
Clinical Oral Study
Participants
For this portion of the study, a third-party clinical site (International Research Services Inc, Port Chester, New
York) was contracted to perform this investigation. This study was conducted according to International
Research Services Inc (IRSI) research policies and standard operating procedures and US and international
standards of good clinical practice (US Food and Drug Administration and International Conference on
Harmonisation [ICH] guidelines) and was approved by an independent institutional review board (IRB).
Informed consent from each participant was obtained prior to enrollment. Twenty-three females in good health
were enrolled, and 20 completed study participation (Table 1). One participant dropped out due to an adverse
event, and 2 others were lost to follow-up. Inclusion criteria consisted of Caucasian females between the ages of
35 and 59 years at time of enrollment with Fitzpatrick skin type scores ranging from II to V. They were
included if they had the presence of facial lines/wrinkles, dryness, roughness, and redness, as determined by an
expert visual grader: lines/wrinkles score of >3 on 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) for both crow’s feet area
and global-face; texture/smoothness of score of >2 on 10-cm VAS; dryness score of >1 on a 5-point ordinal
scale; and erythema score of >1 on a 5-point ordinal scale (due to irritation). The study included only
Caucasians to control for well-established variations in the ways skin responds to stress, inflammation, and
environmental exposure between ethnic groups.25-27
Experimental Design
Participants in this 16-week double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study were randomized to either MSM or
placebo (Table 1) using a prepared randomization code. A 1-week washout period was implemented and
included the use of a daily wash, morning and evening with Camay soap (Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, Ohio).
Product use during the study was limited to the use of a daily wash, morning and evening with Cetaphil Gentle
Facial Cleanser (Galderma Laboratories, LP, Fort Worth, Texas) and application of a moisturizer containing
sunscreen to the face every morning as needed, with reapplication prior to sun exposure at the participant’s
discretion. The treatment group took 3 g per day of OptiMSM® 1000-mg vegetarian capsules (Bergstrom
Nutrition, Vancouver, Washington). The placebo group took 3 capsules each day of rice flour (matched for
appearance and size). Participants, study personnel, and expert graders were blinded to treatment group. Study
personnel were unblinded following statistical analysis.
Table 1. Demographics of Study Participants
Variable
OptiMSM®
Placebo
n
Mean ± SD
Min
Max
n
Mean ± SD
Min
Max
Age, y
11
47.18±7.31
36
57
9
50.11±4.98
40
56
Height, in
11
64.54±3.20
59
71
9
65.11±1.96
61
67
Weight, lb
11
171.00±43.53
115
260
9
160.66±24.72
125
210
n
%
n
%
Ethnicity
11
Not Hispanic
or Latino
11
100
9
Not Hispanic
or Latino
9
100
n
%
n
%
Race
11
White
11
100
9
White
9
100
n
%
n
%
Fitzpatrick
Skin Type
11
Skin Type II
3
27.3
9
Skin Type II
1
11.1
Skin Type III
3
27.3
Skin Type III
6
66.7
Skin Type IV
4
36.4
Skin Type IV
2
22.2
Skin Type V
1
9.1
Skin Type V
0
0.0
n
%
n
%
Facial Skin Type
11
Combination
8
72.7
9
Combination
5
55.6
Dry
3
27.3
Dry
3
33.3
Normal
0
0.0
Normal
1
11.1
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
Outcome Measures
Expert analysis, instrumental measurements, and subjective questionnaires were collected at baseline, week 8,
and week 16.
Expert analysis of participant skin was collected at each timepoint and graded for wrinkles (crow’s feet and
global), tone, texture/smoothness, elasticity, and firmness using a 10-cm VAS. For wrinkle analysis, the VAS
ranged from “None” (0 cm) to, “Numerous lines/wrinkles. Severe, deep” (10 cm). For tone analysis, the VAS
ranged from “Even, healthy skin color” (0 cm) to “Uneven, discolored appearance” (10 cm). For
texture/smoothness analysis, the VAS ranged from “Smooth, silky appearance” (0 cm) to “Coarse, rough
appearance” (10 cm). For firmness analysis, the VAS ranged from “Firm, tight with good recoil properties” (0
cm) to “Loose with poor recoil properties” (10 cm). Measurements were made in cm to the nearest 0.1 cm.
Digital photographs were taken of the front and left side of the participants’ faces using a Clarity™ 2D
Research Ti camera (18 megapixel single-lens reflex camera; BrighTex Bio-Photonics, San Jose, California)
[Author: please verify this manufacturer] under standard light with a matte black background and cape for
analysis of facial lines/wrinkles and crow’s feet. Multispectral lighting reveals skin conditions on and beneath
the skin’s surface layer, and the system uses skin feature recognition to apply automated skin segmentation and
zone mapping for subsequent analysis.
A cutometer was used to measure viscoelastic properties by applying suction to the skin surface and measuring
penetration depth. A corneometer was used to measure skin moisture by measuring electrical capacitance
through 2 closely spaced electrodes. A vapometer was used to measure skin barrier function by measuring
transepidermal water loss (TEWL). TEWL is calculated by measuring relative humidity and temperature in a
closed cylindrical chamber on the skin surface. A spectrophotometric intracutaneous analysis scope (SIAscope,
Astron Clinica Limited, Toft, United Kingdom) was used to analyze melanin, hemoglobin, and collagen by
imaging the skin with high-intensity light-emitting diodes at discreet wavelengths.
Subjective questionnaires were taken at each timepoint to measure participant self-perception of skin qualities,
and tolerance of product was monitored throughout the study. The questionnaires were split into 2 parts: the
first part asked the participant’s agreement level on a 3-point scale with a given statement regarding the product,
and the second asked about percentage of improvement as perceived by the participant (0-100%).
Statistical Analysis
Demographics, visual and instrumental assessments, and tolerance were analyzed with descriptive statistics,
paired t-test (monadic), and unpaired t-tests. Subjective questionnaires were analyzed with descriptive statistics
and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05, and a statistical trend was set at P<0.01.
Results
Preclinical Gene Marker Study
It was demonstrated that MSM influenced skin on a genetic level, and it seems apparent that MSM works in
part by regulating a select number of genes responsible for inflammation, skin barrier, and moisturization, as
Genes Regulated by OptiMSM® in 3D Skin Model:
Category Gene ID Proposed Function in Skin Biology
Aging MMP9* Extracellular matrix breakdown
Aging MMP3
Enzyme involved in extracellular matrix breakdown (II, III, IV, IX, and X, proteoglycans, fibronectin,
laminin, and elastin)
Aging COL7A1 Involve d in the Dermal Epidermal Junction structure assembly
Aging FMOD
Fibromoduli n is a member of a family of small interstiti al proteoglycans, It may participate in the
assembly of the extracellular matrix
Barrier DSG3* Extracellular matrix/Cell adhesion/Barrier function
Barrier LCE3D* Barrier function
Barrier CLDN1 Integral membrane protein and a component of tight junction strands
Inflammation IL1A a primary step of skin inflammation
Inflammation HNRNPD Heterogenous nuclear ribonuclear protein D, a regulator of inflammatory cytokine mRNA stability
Moisture AQP3 Aquaporin 3-Involved in the channeli ng of water through the epidermis
Pigmentation BMP4* Whitening/Melanoge nesis
Repair & Scaring BMP2
Bone Morphogenic Protein 2, is a pleomorphic growth factor that induces cellular growth,
maturation, and fibroplasia in both the dermis and epidermis, impli cated in the biology of scarring
Stress HMOX1 Heme oxygenase 1 involved in the adaptive response to stress
Stress SOD1 Super Oxide Dismutase 1, an important antioxidant def ense in nearly all cells exposed to oxygen
* Statistical ly significa nt fold-change da ta for 2.5% OptiMSM® VS Steri le Water cont rol
well as those genes involved in the structural integrity of the skin which are associated with the aging process
(Table 2).
Table 2. Genes Modulated by Methylsulfonylmethane in 3-dimesional Skin Equivalents
Clinical Oral Study
Tolerance
Comparative data analysis revealed no statistically significant performance differences between results from
groups using MSM and placebo. One adverse event was reported from a participant in the placebo group, and
she chose to discontinue the study.
Expert Visual Grading
When expert visual grading results were examined for MSM the data revealed a statistically significant
improvement from mean baseline at week 8 (‒0.31 cm±0.39, P=0.024) and week 16 (‒0.84 cm±0.67, P=0.002)
for crow’s feet lines/wrinkles; tone at week 8 (‒0.45 cm±0.60, P=0.032) and week 16 (‒0.70 cm±0.93
P=0.031); texture/smoothness at week 8 (‒0.80 cm±1.13, P=0.040) and week 16 (‒1.50 cm±0.94, P<0.001);
and improvements at week 16 for elasticity (‒0.53 cm±0.53, P=0.007) and firmness (‒0.53 cm±0.47, P=0.004).
Results for placebo revealed statistically significant worsening for skin firmness at week 8 (data not shown).
Comparison analysis revealed statistically significant performance differences between MSM and placebo for
firmness at week 8 (P=0.046) and a statistical trend with regard to crow’s feet lines/wrinkles at weeks 8 and 16
(P=0.063, P=0.090; Figure 1).
Figure 1. Expert clinical grader evaluation compared to baseline: crow’s feet line/wrinkles (1A) and firmness
(1B). Compared to baseline crow’s feet line/wrinkles (1C), firmness (1D), tone (1E), and skin texture (1F).
1A 1B
1C 1D
1E 1F
Instrumental Assessments
Vapometer results for the MSM group showed statistically significant improvements when compared to
baseline values for skin barrier function at week 8 (‒4.72±6.52, P=0.037) and week 16 (‒5.79±5.54, P=0.006),
with 100% of participants in the MSM group showing improvement at week 16, but these results were not
statistically significant compared to placebo (data not shown). Cutometer results for skin firmness and elasticity
did not show any statistically significant improvements over baseline (data not shown). SIAscope results
showed statistically significant hemoglobin improvements for MSM when compared to baseline at week 8
(15.69±19.02, P=0.021) and week 16 (14.10±19.68, P=0.039) but not when compared to placebo. A statistically
significant increase in melanin was observed in the MSM group at week 16 when compared to baseline
(14.74±20.72, P=0.040) but was not statistically significant when compared to placebo (data not shown).
Clarity™ Pro data, used to analyze wrinkle parameters digitally, shows that in all but 1 instance, mean results
for the particpants using MSM were better than those for participants using placebo and improvements over
placebo reached statistical significance in 7 categories. Results for analysis of crow’s feet fine lines and
wrinkles showed MSM reduced total wrinkle count by 2.95 over placebo at week 16 (P=0.012; Figure 2A);
reduced average length by 36.74 pixels over placebo at week 16 (P=0.019; Figure 2B); reduced average wrinkle
severity by 3.82 over placebo at week 16 (P=0.024; Figure 2C); and reduced deep line counts by 0.78 over
placebo at week 16 (P=0.036; Figure 2D). Results for analysis of global lines and wrinkles showed MSM
reduced total wrinkle count by 10.20 wrinkles over placebo at week 16 (P=0.042; Figure 3A); reduced the
average length by 5.10 pixels at week 8 and 12.60 pixels at week 16 over placebo (P=0.032, P=0.004; Figure
3B); and reduced wrinkle severity by 8.44 over placebo at week 16 (P<0.001; Figure 3C). A representative
example of Clarity™ Pro analysis using digital lines can be seen in Figure 4.
Figure 2. Clarity™ Pro image analysis (pixel count) of fine lines and wrinkles (crow’s feet): total wrinkles
(2A), wrinkle length (2B), wrinkle severity (2C), and deep line count (2D).
2A 2B
2C 2D
Figure 3. Clarity™ Pro image analysis (pixel count) of fine lines and wrinkles (global): total wrinkles (3A),
wrinkle length (3B), and wrinkle severity (3C).
3A 3B
3C
Figure 4. A representative example of Clarity™ Pro imaging shows the computer generated wrinkle tracings of
the left side for crow’s feet analysis (4A) and frontal view for global assessment (4B) for a participant in the
methylsulfonylmethan group.
Figure 4A. From left to right: baseline, week 8, week 16 (Participant 1)
Figure 4B. From left to right: baseline, week 8, week 16 (Participant 1)
Subjective Assessment
These data were further supported by self-assessment data collected from the participants at week 16 from both
groups. Participants taking MSM had more favorable self-assessment scores than those taking the placebo,
based on the percentage of participants responding favorably (in excess of 50% for each question posed and
choosing the top 2 scores relating to improvement on the scale of 1 to 5; Figure 5). Although statistical
significance was not reached for any individual question, the global assessment is an important demonstration
of congruence between the expert grader and instrumentation data. Visual representation of the skin health
improvements seen across all 3 measurement methodologies are provided for 2 participants (Figures 6 and 7).
Representative examples of skin improvements in the MSM group can be seen in Figures 6 and 7. Figure 6
shows global evaluation area for expert graders between baseline and week 16 for participant 1. Figure 7 shows
crow’s feet evaluation area for expert graders at all 3 timepoints for participant 1 and participant 2.
Figure 5. Self-assessment results taken at week 16: Graph demonstrates the percentage of participants
responding favorably in each category.
Figure 6. Global facial observation: baseline (left) and week 16 (right) photos of a representative
methylsulfonylmethan-treated participant showing improvements in even tone and texture with visibly
noticeable reductions in overall facial redness and mottled pigmentation (Participant 2)
Figure 7. Magnified images of 2 methylsulfonylmethan-treated participants showing improvements from
baseline to week 16 of treatment focusing on the crow’s feet area and undereye fine lines and wrinkles as well
as overall skin appearance in terms of mottle pigmentation and redness.
Figure 7A. From left to right: baseline, week 8, week 16 (Participant 2)
Figure 7B. From left to right: baseline, week 8, week 16 (Participant 1)
Discussion
The process of aging is most often associated with its visible effects on the skin. The skin mirrors the aging
process both physiologically and socially.4 Endogenously, the process of aging and its effects on the skin are
associated with age-related gene expression, inflammation, hormone levels, and lack of proper nutrition.
Exogenously, aging increases exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation, toxins, and reactive oxygen species
(ROS).28 The skin is affected by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors of aging and manifests largely through the
formation of wrinkles, mottled pigmentation, and erythema that can form as a result of both endogenous and
exogenous factors.7 Because underlying causes of skin-aging manifest through socially perceptible symptoms,
skin health can be assessed through observation, self-perception, and laboratory instruments. The strength of the
present study was the assessment of skin health utilizing all 3 methodologies. Expert grading indicated
improvements in several markers, especially for the presence of crow’s feet. Participant self-assessment
questionnaires indicated overall satisfaction with skin health in both groups. Instrumentation assessments
showed a significant improvement over placebo in the number, size, and severity of facial wrinkles, as well as
improved barrier function as measured with the vapometer. MSM showed differentiation and improved
performance over that of placebo in several areas assessed while placebo did not outperform MSM. Measurable
improvements across 3 separate forms of assessment suggest a benefit to skin health from MSM
supplementation for the study demographic.
The most noticeable effect throughout all 3 assessments was the reduction in the number, size, and severity of
wrinkles. Expert grading showed an improvement in crow’s feet for the MSM group from baseline and also
when compared to placebo. Consumer self-perception for wrinkles reported a majority of positive responses to
questions about wrinkles. Instrumental analysis utilizing photographic measurements of wrinkles showed those
taking MSM had a measurable reduction in the number, size, and severity of facial wrinkles when compared to
placebo. The formation of wrinkles results from impaired barrier function, loss of cells, and reduction of
underlying extracellular matrix (ECM). MSM may partially improve wrinkles through increased barrier
function, as suggested by the vapometer results in this study. Preclinical results also indicate that MSM
modifies the genes DSG3 and LCE3D, both of which are associated with barrier function (Table 2). This lends
biochemical support to the clinical improvements in barrier function. Other benefits may come from supplying
and protecting the ECM and by protecting cells in the dermal and epidermal layers.
A major mechanism of skin aging is the loss or damage of ECM proteins through decreased production or
increased damage from endogenous and exogenous sources.29 ECM proteins require disulfide bonds for
structural adhesion and formation and require sulfur-containing amino acids (SAA) for protein synthesis.30,31 It
has been suggested that MSM sulfur can be incorporated into SAAs, providing necessary building blocks for
healthy protein synthesis.18 MSM may also compartmentalize sulfur sources within the body, sparing necessary
building blocks (unpublished data). Although MSM’s role in the body’s sulfur pathways may be a contributing
factor, it is unlikely to fully account for all observed benefits.
Degradation of the ECM is a major contributor to the aging process.8 MSM may help reduce wrinkles by
protecting ECM proteins from damage and degradation by attenuating inflammation and reducing oxidative
stress. Previous authors have found that MSM dramatically inhibits the expression of inflammatory cytokines
by attenuating NF-κB activation and inhibiting inflammasome activation.32 One study showed MSM inhibits
lipopolysaccharide-induced increases in NO and PGE2 production through suppression of inducible nitric oxide
synthase and COX-2 expression and that MSM strongly inhibits IL-6 and TNF-α production by suppressing the
expression of NF-κB.21 In human chondrocytes, MSM is able to reduce the expression of IL-6 and IL-8 through
attenuation of NF-κB and p38 MAPK.33 Several other studies have shown MSM to reduce IL-1, IL-6, and TNF-
α, likely through upstream inhibition of NF-κB.34-36 In the skin, inhibition of NF-κB benefits the ECM through
reduced expression of inflammatory cytokines and by reduced activation of AP-1. When AP-1 is activated, it
stimulates production of collagen-degrading MMPs and it blocks the transforming growth factor-β type II
receptors necessary for collagen production.7,37 This may account for the effects of MSM on MMP3 and MMP9
in the preclinical gene expression study (Table 2). The reduction of inflammatory cytokines resulting from the
inhibition of NF-κB provides protection for the ECM. TNF-α, IL-1, and IL-6 increase production of ROS and
can damage cells responsible for protein production.38,39 Oxidative stress contributes to the degradation of ECM
proteins. Increased levels of ROS can result from increased oxidation from exogenous sources, like UV
radiation or from endogenous inflammation.38 They can also result from inadequate antioxidative capacity
within the body.40 GSH is produced within the body and functions as the primary antioxidant. Several studies
have indicated that MSM increases GSH levels and improved overall antioxidant capacity. Several animal
studies have shown that treatment with MSM results in increased levels of GSH, SOD, and CAT.20,41,42 In a
clinical trial using exercise to induce oxidative stress, MSM was effective in reducing markers of oxidative
stress, increase overall levels of GSH, and improve the ratio of reduced to oxidized GSH (GSH/GSSG).43 ECM
proteins can be directly damaged by free radicals, altering their structure and function, resulting in skin that is
less firm and more prone to wrinkles. ROS also trigger a cascade of downstream inflammatory pathways.
Adequate GSH levels mitigate the damage from oxidation and can prevent further inflammation. Initial
production of collagen fibers requires sufficient GSH to form crosslinks.30 Homocysteine degrades and inhibits
formation of collagen, elastin, and proteoglycans.44 Serum levels of homocysteine are inversely related to levels
of GSH, although multiple factors and pathways influence production. People supplementing with MSM have
been shown to have decreased levels of homocysteine.14,24 Modulation of NF-κB and/or increased levels of
GSH may play a role in MSM’s effect on levels of homocysteine.
Limitations of this study included a small sample size, homogeneity of participants, and seasonal variations that
were not controlled for. All participants were women of Caucasian descent within a restricted age range.
Homogeneity of participants helped control for variation within a small study population, but results cannot be
generalized to the larger population.
Of note, a large placebo effect may have been generated by the strong seasonal variation from baseline to weeks
8 and 16 as the weather moved from winter to spring conditions. Interestingly, the MSM group demonstrated a
higher level of melanin production vs the placebo group, though it was not statistically significant. Examining
the genes stimulated by MSM, there is a significant increase in bone morphogenic protein 4, which plays a role
in promoting pigmentation.45
Conclusion
Under the conditions of this study, use of MSM led to significant improvements in skin’s appearance and
condition as evaluated by expert grading, instrumental measures, and participant self-assessment. Although the
mechanism of action is not well understood, it is apparent that MSM does work at altering gene expression of
key genes that affect moisturization and barrier function, extracellular matrix production, and inflammation
control. Inflammation, oxidation, and gene expression in skin cells are highly interconnected, and previous
research indicates MSM has a positive effect on all 3, although the root mechanism or mechanisms are not fully
understood. The results of this study suggest that the effects of MSM previously characterized through
biochemical measurements translate into measurable clinical effects. MSM taken orally may be beneficial for
skin health and the reduction of fine lines and wrinkles, though further research is warranted in broader
populations.
Acknowledgements
We thank Robert Frumento and Francis Friscia from International Research Services, Inc, for their expertise
and guidance regarding the clinical work presented in this manuscript and Ameann DeJohn from Ameann
Solutions for her dedication and consultation.
References
1. Chuong CM, Nickoloff BJ, Elias PM, et al. What is the “true” function of skin? Exp Dermatol.
2002;11(2):159-187.
2. Yaar M, Eller MS, Gilchrest BA. Fifty years of skin aging. J Investig Dermatology Symp Proc. 2002;7(1):51-
58.
3. Gupta MA, Gilchrest BA. Psychosocial aspects of aging skin. Dermatol Clin. 2005;23(4):643-648.
4. Nikolakis G, Makrantonaki E, Zouboulis CC. Skin mirrors human aging. Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig.
2013;16(1):13-28.
5. Browner WS, Kahn AJ, Ziv E, et al. The genetics of human longevity. Am J Med. 2004;117(11):851-860.
6. Fisher GJ, Kang S, Varani J, et al. Mechanisms of photoaging and chronological skin aging. Arch Dermatol.
2002;138(11):1462-1470.
7. Hwang KA, Yi BR, Choi KC. Molecular mechanisms and in vivo mouse models of skin aging associated
with dermal matrix alterations. Lab Anim Res. 2011;27(1):1-8.
8. Robert L, Labat-Robert J, Robert AM. Physiology of skin aging. Clin Plast Surg. 2012;39(1):1-8.
9. Patel N, Padhtrare D, Saudagar RB. Newer trends in cosmetology. World J Pharm Pharmaceut Sci.
2015;4(3):483-502.
10. Anunciato TP, da Rocha Filho PA. Carotenoids and polyphenols in nutricosmetics, nutraceuticals, and
cosmeceuticals. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2012;11(1):51-54.
11. Magnuson BA, Appleton J, Ryan B, Matulka RA. Oral developmental toxicity study of
methylsulfonylmethane in rats. Food Chem Toxicol. 2007;45(6):977-984.
12. Pagonis TA, Givissis PA, Kritis AC, Christodoulou AC. The effect of methylsulfonylmethane on
osteoarthritic large joints and mobility. Int J Orthop. 2014;1(1):19-24.
13. Barrager E, Veltmann JR, Schauss AG, Schiller RN. A multicentered, open-label trial on the safety and
efficacy of methylsulfonylmethane in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. J Altern Complement Med.
2002;8(2):167-173.
14. Kalman DS, Feldman S, Scheinberg AR, Krieger DR, Bloomer RJ. Influence of methylsulfonylmethane on
markers of exercise recovery and performance in healthy men: a pilot study. J Int Soc Sports Nutr.
2012;9(1):46.
15. Nimni ME, Han B, Cordoba F. Are we getting enough sulfur in our diet? Nutr Metab (Lond). 2007 Nov
6;4:24.
16. Boudko SP, Engel J. Structure formation in the C terminus of type III collagen guides disulfide cross-
linking. J Mol Biol. 2004;335(5):1289-1297.
17. Bragulla HH, Homberger DG. Structure and functions of keratin proteins in simple, stratified, keratinized
and cornified epithelia. J Anat. 2009;214(4):516-559.
18. Richmond VL. Incorporation of methylsulfonylmethane sulfur into guinea pig serum proteins. Life Sci.
1986;39(3):263-268.
19. Salminen A, Huuskonen J, Ojala J, Kauppinen A, Kaarniranta K, Suuronen T. Activation of innate
immunity system during aging: NF-kB signaling is the molecular culprit of inflamm-aging. Ageing Res Rev.
2008;7(2):83-105.
20. Amirshahrokhi K, Bohlooli S. Effect of methylsulfonylmethane on paraquat-induced acute lung and liver
injury in mice. Inflammation. 2013;36(5):1111-1121.
21. Kim YH, Kim DH, Lim H, Baek DY, Shin HK, Kim JK. The anti-inflammatory effects of
methylsulfonylmethane on lipopolysaccharide-induced inflammatory responses in murine macrophages. Biol
Pharm Bull. 2009;32(4):651-656.
22. Bickers DR, Athar M. Oxidative stress in the pathogenesis of skin disease. J Invest Dermatol.
2006;126(12):2565-2575.
23. Nakhostin-Roohi B, Barmaki S, Khoshkhahesh F, Bohlooli S. Effect of chronic supplementation with
methylsulfonylmethane on oxidative stress following acute exercise in untrained healthy men. J Pharm
Pharmacol. 2011;63(10):1290-1294.
24. Kim L, Axelrod L, Howard P, Buratovich N. Efficacy of methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) in osteoarthritis
pain of the knee: a pilot clinical trial. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2006;14(3):286-294.
25. Wang H, Papoiu AD, Coghill RC, Patel T, Wang N, Yosipovitch G. Ethnic differences in pain, itch and
thermal detection in response to topical capsaicin: African Americans display a notably limited hyperalgesia
and neurogenic inflammation. Br J Dermatol. 2010;162(5):1023-1029.
26. Tadokoro T, Yamaguchi Y, Batzer J, et al. Mechanisms of skin tanning in different racial/ethnic groups in
response to ultraviolet radiation. J Invest Dermatol. 2005;124(6):1326-1332.
27. Das A. How does race get “under the skin”?: inflammation, weathering, and metabolic problems in late life.
Soc Sci Med. 2013 Jan;77:75-83.
28. Landau M. Exogenous factors in skin aging. Curr Probl Dermatol. 2007;35:1-13.
29. Parkinson LG, Toro A, Zhao H, Brown K, Tebbutt SJ, Granville DJ. Granzyme B mediates both direct and
indirect cleavage of extracellular matrix in skin after chronic low-dose ultraviolet light irradiation. Aging Cell.
2015;14(1):67-77.
30. Koivu J, Myllyla R. Interchain disulfide bond formation in types I and II procollagen. Evidence for a protein
disulfide isomerase catalyzing bond formation. J Biol Chem. 1987;262(13):6159-6164.
31. Ilani T, Alon A, Grossman I, et al. A secreted disulfide catalyst controls extracellular matrix composition
and function. Science. 2013;341(6141):74-76.
32. Ahn H, Kim J, Jeung EB, Lee GS. Dimethyl sulfoxide inhibits NLRP3 inflammasome activation.
Immunobiology. 2014;219(4):315-322.
33. Kloesch B, Liszt M, Broell J, Steiner G. Dimethyl sulphoxide and dimethyl sulphone are potent inhibitors of
IL-6 and IL-8 expression in the human chondrocyte cell line C-28/I2. Life Sci. 2011;89(13-14):473-478.
34. Kamel R, El Morsy EM. Hepatoprotective effect of methylsulfonylmethane against carbon tetrachloride-
induced acute liver injury in rats. Arch Pharm Res. 2013;36(9):1140-1148.
35. Oshima Y, Amiel D, Theodosakis J. The effect of distilled methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) on human
chondrocytes in vitro. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2007;15(Suppl C):C213.
36. Amirshahrokhi K, Bohlooli S, Chinifroush MM. The effect of methylsulfonylmethane on the experimental
colitis in the rat. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2011;253(3):197-202.
37. Fujioka S, Niu J, Schmidt C, et al. NF-kappaB and AP-1 connection: mechanism of NF-kappaB-dependent
regulation of AP-1 activity. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24(17):7806-7819.
38. Wagener FA, Carels CE, Lundvig DM. Targeting the redox balance in inflammatory skin conditions. Int J
Mol Sci. 2013;14(5):9126-9167.
39. Ågren MS, Schnabel R, Christensen LH, Mirastschijski U. Tumor necrosis factor-α-accelerated degradation
of type I collagen in human skin is associated with elevated matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1 and MMP-3 ex
vivo. Eur J Cell Biol. 2015;94(1):12-21.
40. Hernanz A, Fernandez-Vivancos E, Montiel C, Vazquez JJ, Arnalich F. Changes in the intracellular
homocysteine and glutathione content associated with aging. Life Sci. 2000;67(11):1317-1324.
41. Mohammadi S, Najafi M, Hamzeiy H, et al. Protective effects of methylsulfonylmethane on hemodynamics
and oxidative stress in monocrotaline-induced pulmonary hypertensive rats. Adv Pharmacol Sci.
2012;2012:507278.
42. Bohlooli S, Mohammadi S, Amirshahrokhi K, et al. Effect of methylsulfonylmethane pretreatment on
acetaminophen induced hepatotoxicity in rats. Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2013;16(8):896-900.
43. Nakhostin-Roohi B, Barmaki S, Khoshkhahesh F, Bohlooli S. Effect of chronic supplementation with
methylsulfonylmethane on oxidative stress following acute exercise in untrained healthy men. J Pharm
Pharmacol. 2011;63(10):1290-1294.
44. Namazi MR, Feily A. Homocysteine may accelerate skin aging: A new chapter in the biology of skin
senescence? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;64(6):1175-1178.
45. Singh SK, Abbas WA, Tobin DJ. Bone morphogenetic proteins differentially regulate pigmentation in
human skin cells. J Cell Sci. 2012;125(Pt 18):4306-4319.
