PDRN Sunscreen: What Salmon DNA Does in a Lab, and What It Can’t Do in Your SPF

Salmon DNA is the biggest ingredient story in K-beauty right now, and in 2026 it reached the sunscreen aisle. A PDRN sunscreen promises the usual SPF plus something that sounds like a clinic treatment: DNA fragments that help your skin repair itself. One trend site describes the best-known product this way: “a meaningful PDRN concentration positioned high in the ingredient list.”^[21] So we opened that product’s ingredient list. Sodium DNA, the name PDRN goes by on a cosmetic label, is printed 58th of 58 ingredients, at a declared 0.05 ppb.^[15] Last place, with a number attached. That gap between the claim and the label is what this article is about. Exosomes are running the same play, where the marketing has arrived well before the sunscreens have.

What PDRN actually is, and where the salmon comes in

PDRN stands for polydeoxyribonucleotide, and the cleanest description comes from a 2017 pharmacology review by Squadrito and colleagues: “PDRN is a proprietary and registered drug that possesses several activities: tissue repairing, anti-ischemic, and anti-inflammatory.”^[1] Note the wording. A drug, not a skincare ingredient. The same review explains the fish part: “PDRN holds a mixture of deoxyribonucleotides with molecular weights ranging between 50 and 1,500 KDa, it is derived from a controlled purification and sterilization process of Oncorhynchus mykiss (Salmon Trout) or Oncorhynchus keta (Chum Salmon) sperm DNA.”^[1] So yes, the raw material genuinely is salmon or trout sperm DNA, cut into fragments.

In Korea, PDRN’s life as a medicine is specific and narrow. Rejuvenex (리쥬비넥스주), an injectable registered with the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, is a prescription-only drug containing 5.625 mg of polydeoxyribonucleotide sodium per 3 mL ampoule. Its approved indication, in our translation of the registry entry, is the treatment of wounds from skin grafts and tissue repair, given as one ampoule a day by intramuscular or subcutaneous injection.^[12] Wrinkles and glow are not in that document. In Italy, where PDRN was developed, the manufacturer Mastelli lists Placentex in four forms: two injectables, a skin solution, and a “0,08% cream” positioned as containing “a pharmaceutical active ingredient.”^[13]

On a cosmetic label, none of these names appear. The INCI name is Sodium DNA, whose official function in the European ingredient database is listed as, in full, “Skin conditioning.”^[14] There is no cosmetic ingredient called PDRN; the ingredient database has no page under that name at all.^[14] Keep that translation in mind for the label section below: when a sunscreen advertises PDRN, the word you will actually find in the ingredient list is Sodium DNA.

What it has been shown to do, and how it got into the body

The mechanism story is genuinely interesting. Per the Squadrito review, “In vitro and in vivo experiments have suggested that PDRN most relevant mechanism of action is the engagement of adenosine A(2A) receptors.”^[1] Beyond that receptor, the fragments supply ready-made nucleosides and nucleotides through what the review calls the “salvage pathway”, a shortcut that lets stressed cells rebuild DNA without synthesizing the parts from scratch.^[1]

The clinical showcase is a wound trial. In 2014, the same group ran a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 216 patients with hard-to-heal diabetic foot ulcers. After eight weeks, “Complete healing was achieved in 18.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.4-26.3] of placebo and in 37.3% (95% CI 28.2-46.3) of PDRN-treated patients (P = .0027).”^[2] That is a real, roughly doubled healing rate. Now the delivery detail that matters for a sunscreen article: the treatments were “performed for 8 weeks by intramuscular and perilesional route.”^[2] Injected into muscle and around the wound. Nothing was rubbed on.

The aesthetic-clinic evidence follows the same route. A 2016 paper notes that PDRN “is popularly used for faster healing of cutaneous wounds and boosting of neocollagenesis of photoaged skin among current dermatologic practitioners”, and its own clinical section describes six patients receiving intradermal injections.^[7] A 2025 systematic review of polynucleotide treatments in aesthetic medicine (a wider product family that includes PDRN) found: “Nine studies, of low and moderate quality, were included in this review, describing a population of 219 patients receiving PN treatment.”^[4] Its verdict: “Rigorous, high-quality studies are essential to validate the effectiveness and safety of PN.”^[4] One of its authors is disclosed as a key opinion leader and clinical trainer for a distributor of Mastelli polynucleotide devices, which is worth knowing when you weigh it.^[4]

A 2026 narrative review of PDRN in post-procedure recovery states the positive and the negative in back-to-back sentences, and both deserve to travel together. First: “There is human clinical evidence (including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparative cohort studies, and split-face trials) that PDRN enhances the period of re-epithelialization, erythema, scarring, and melanogenesis, which are the direct clinical outcomes with respect to post-procedural aesthetic recovery.” Then: “The limitations of the technique, however, are a lack of RCTs (with human aesthetic cohorts), small sample sizes, variability in formulations, and a lack of long-term follow-up.”^[5] Promising and thin at the same time. And again: recovery after procedures, delivered in clinics.

The one trial that put PDRN on skin, and what it is not

It would be wrong to say no one has ever run a randomized trial of PDRN applied to human skin. One exists, published in PLoS One in 2026, and its details are the point. The authors open with the gap: “Polydeoxyribonucleotide (PDRN) has shown regenerative effects in injectable applications, but the mechanism and delivery of topical PDRN remain insufficiently defined.”^[3] Their design: “Clinical efficacy was evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, split-face study comparing 0.1% PDRN-850K eye cream with 0.1% retinol over 28 days.”^[3] The participants were “Thirty-one healthy Chinese female volunteers aged 35–55 years”.^[3] The result read well for the cream: “PDRN-850K achieved approximately two-fold greater improvements in periocular wrinkles, dermal thickness, density, and eye bag parameters compared with retinol, with good tolerability.”^[3]

Here is what that trial is not. It is not a sunscreen study; the product was an eye cream at 0.1%. It had no placebo arm, so “two-fold greater than retinol” is not “better than nothing”, it is “better than another active.” It ran 28 days on 31 people. And while the paper declares “The authors declare no conflicts of interest”, the author list includes three of the five authors affiliated with two Shanghai cosmetic companies, the UNISKIN Research Institute on Skin Aging (Inertia Shanghai Biotechnology) and DermaHealth Shanghai Biotechnology.^[3] We report the affiliation alongside the declaration and let you weigh both.

The penetration data in that same paper is the most useful part for a sunscreen reader. In tests on human skin, labeled PDRN was tracked “beyond 20 μm into the superficial viable epidermis at 8–24 h.”^[3] The top layers, after 8 to 24 hours. That fits a general problem stated plainly in a 2026 materials paper: “Biomacromolecular therapeutics face critical size-dependent transdermal delivery limitations that restrict their clinical effectiveness.”^[8] PDRN fragments are large molecules, and large molecules do not stroll through intact skin. It also fits the one head-to-head animal comparison we could find, a 2018 mouse wound study: “The wound healing effects were the greatest in the O. keta-derived PDRN injection and O. mykiss-derived PDRN injection groups, which showed similar scores, followed by the O. keta-derived cream and normal saline soaked dressing groups.”^[6] In mice, the cream trailed the injections.

And the sunscreen context specifically? We searched PubMed for it on August 23, 2026, three ways: PDRN with sunscreen, with sun protection factor, with photoprotection. Zero results, zero, zero.^[23] The full query log is in the sources. So the accurate sentence is this: one randomized topical trial exists, it was an eye cream, and for PDRN inside a sunscreen there is no study at all.

Where PDRN actually is on a PDRN sunscreen label

Marketing settled, labels next. For the table below we pulled each product’s full ingredient list on August 23, 2026, counting positions from the INCIDecoder database (which now serves from inkeedecoder.com), and then hunted for the same figure on a second, independent source: the brand’s official Korean page or a retailer’s listing. One product cleared that bar three times over. For three others, the ppb figure exists only on the database listing, and the table says so. A declared figure a brand chose to print is worth quoting either way, but single-source numbers wear a flag here.

Product (SPF)	Sodium DNA position	Printed amount	How confirmed	UV filters	Adenosine / niacinamide
Medicube PDRN Pink Tone Up Sun Cream (SPF50+ PA++++)	58 of 58	“Sodium Dna (0.05 Ppb)”	Three sources: database listing, Medicube’s official Korean page (“소듐디엔에이(0.05 ppb)”), and StyleKorean (“Formulated with Sodium DNA (PDRN) at 0.05 ppb”)[15]	Hybrid: titanium dioxide (position 5), EHT, BEMT, MBBT, DHHB	#37 / #10
Dr.G Skin Boost PDRN Sun Serum (SPF50+ PA++++)	40 of 46	“Sodium Dna (55,000 Ppb)” = 0.0055%	Figure on the database listing only; YesStyle’s list has Sodium DNA at #40 of 47 with no number[16]	EHS, EHT, octocrylene, DHHB, TDSA, BEMT	#39 / #10
SNP PDRN Ectoin UV Aging Recovery Sun Serum (SPF50+ PA++++)	19 of 61	“Sodium Dna (1 Ppb)”	Database listing only[17]	EHT, drometrizole trisiloxane, TDSA, DHHB, BEMT	#32 / #6
VT PDRN Glow Sun Essence (SPF50+ PA+++)	17 of 50	“Sodium Dna (5 Ppb)”	Database listing only[18]	Avobenzone, EHS, homosalate, PBSA, octocrylene, BEMT	#32 / #9
VT PDRN Moist Tone Up Sun Essence	43 of 54	Not printed	Database listing[19]	EHS, DHHB, titanium dioxide, BEMT, EHT	#34 / #10
Medicube PDRN Hydrating Sun Serum (Korean version)	39 of 49	Not printed	Medicube’s official Korean page. The US version (“No Cast Just Dew”) is a different formula: four OTC filters, Sodium DNA at #36 of 38 inactives[20]	KR: DHHB, EHT, drometrizole trisiloxane, TDSA	#37 / #8 (KR)

Filter shorthand: EHT = ethylhexyl triazone, BEMT = bis-ethylhexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine, MBBT = methylene bis-benzotriazolyl tetramethylbutylphenol, DHHB = diethylamino hydroxybenzoyl hexyl benzoate, EHS = ethylhexyl salicylate, TDSA = terephthalylidene dicamphor sulfonic acid, PBSA = phenylbenzimidazole sulfonic acid. “Not printed” means no amount is declared; it does not mean zero, and we have no way to measure it.

Two readings before anyone panics or celebrates. First, position by itself is weak evidence: below the one percent line, ingredient order carries almost no information about quantity, and we have walked through why in our niacinamide sunscreen guide and used it to rank centella sunscreens by label position. The SNP serum is the living proof in this very table: Sodium DNA at a flattering position 19, with a printed value of 1 ppb. High on the list, next to nothing in the jar, at least per the listing. Second, the printed numbers deserve respect precisely because brands did not have to print them. Medicube put 0.05 ppb on its own official page; counting the database listing and StyleKorean’s description, that is three places. We quote it as printed.

That same SNP serum, incidentally, declares its ectoin at 1,000 ppb, and we have already covered what ectoin evidence looks like inside a sunscreen. Different molecule, same pattern.

Drug strength, trial strength, sunscreen strength

Here are the concentrations this article has mentioned, in one place, converted to the same unit where a conversion is honest. We are deliberately not computing any “X times less” figure; a 0.05 ppb print could contain a decimal error somewhere upstream, and multiplying an uncertain number only launders the uncertainty. Read the rows and note where the digits sit.

Context	Declared PDRN / Sodium DNA	In ppb
Eye cream in the 2026 randomized trial[3]	0.1%	1,000,000
Placentex cream, sold as a drug in Italy[13]	“0,08% cream”	800,000
Dr.G sun serum (single-source listing)[16]	0.0055%	55,000
VT Glow sun essence (single-source listing)[18]		5
SNP sun serum (single-source listing)[17]		1
Medicube Pink Tone Up sun cream (three sources)[15]		0.05

The Korean prescription injectable, for reference, delivers 5.625 mg per 3 mL ampoule into muscle or under the skin.^[12] It does not convert cleanly to ppb of a cream, so it gets a sentence instead of a row. The two sun essences with no printed figure, VT Moist and the Medicube Hydrating serum, could fall anywhere; undisclosed is undisclosed.

Not on Korea’s functional cosmetics list, and what is

Korea runs a system of “functional cosmetics”, where certain ingredients at certain doses are pre-recognized by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety for specific claims. We read the current annex of that regulation, the table of ingredients exempt from case-by-case review. DNA does not appear in it. Neither does PDRN, polydeoxyribonucleotide, or any nucleic acid entry; our searches of the document text came back empty. What the table does contain: adenosine at 0.04% for wrinkle improvement, and niacinamide at 2 to 5% for brightening, plus the roster of approved UV filters.^[11]

Now look back at the last column of the label table. All six of these PDRN sunscreens contain adenosine, and all six contain niacinamide. So when a tube in this category carries a functional-cosmetic claim, the ingredients legally capable of carrying it are the listed ones, the adenosine, the niacinamide, the filters, and not the salmon DNA the front of the tube is named after. We are not asserting which claim any specific product registered, because we have not read each label’s certification line. The structure is the point, and it is not new: we saw the same thing when a chemist noted that an Isntree gel is registered as functional because of its niacinamide and adenosine, not its headline ingredient.

One more label surprise: the PDRN may not even be salmon. VT’s official Korean retail page describes the PDRN in its Glow sun essence as plant PDRN, low molecular weight, extracted from wild-simulated ginseng (our translation of “산양삼에서 추출한 저분자 식물성 PDRN”).^[18] That is consistent with where the ingredient industry is heading; recent papers propose PDRN from peony (“Paeonia lactiflora-derived PDRN (Peony PDRN) is proposed as a plant-based alternative to salmon-derived PDRN”, from authors employed by NewLife BST)^[9] and from rose (from L’Oréal-affiliated authors).^[10] The INCI name Sodium DNA does not tell you the species. For the other brands in our table, the source organism is not stated on the pages we read, so we make no claim either way.

What a PDRN sunscreen can and can’t do for you

Start with what it can do: everything the filters do. Every product in the table above is a legitimate modern sunscreen, and several carry filter lineups we would call excellent. SPF and PA come from the filter column, full stop, and if your goal is preventing photoaging, the filters are the part with trial evidence.

The trend copy claims more. The same article that put the Medicube product’s PDRN “positioned high in the ingredient list” also offers a division of labor where “the UV filters block the majority of radiation, while the PDRN simultaneously activates repair mechanisms for the small percentage that penetrates.”^[21] That is a testable claim, and no one has tested it: recall the zero results for PDRN in a sunscreen or photoprotection context.^[23] The only topical randomized evidence is an eye cream at 0.1%, and the sunscreens above print figures from 20 to 20 million times smaller. We said we would not do that multiplication, and we are not; we will just note that 0.1% and 0.05 ppb do not live on the same floor of the building, or in the same building.

A dermatologist blogger writing about topical PDRN put the ceiling well, and we quote her as an opinion, not as data: “Scientific evidence for topical PDRN is limited”, and “because it cannot reach the deeper dermal layers where fibroblasts live, its benefits are generally mild and more supportive than transformative.”^[22] In a later trend piece she called topical PDRN a “supportive buffer.”^[22] That is roughly where the penetration data from the eye cream trial points too.

So our buying advice is unexciting: choose from this category the way you would choose any sunscreen. Filters, finish, white cast, price. Our guide to sunscreens with actives covers the framework, and if the tone-up finish is what draws you to the pink Medicube, tinted and tone-up sunscreens are a whole category with more options. One practical footnote for US readers: the American version of Medicube’s PDRN sun serum is a different formula with four US OTC filters, a pattern we dug into when Consumer Reports tested Korean sunscreens. The PDRN on the label is not a reason to buy, and at these printed amounts, not a reason to avoid, either. It is a fragrance note in the marketing, not a second engine.

FAQ

Is the PDRN in sunscreen the same as PDRN injections?

The molecule family is the same, salmon or trout DNA fragments, and pharmacology reviews describe PDRN as “a proprietary and registered drug.”^[1] The delivery is not the same, and delivery is the whole question. The evidence that made PDRN famous comes from injections: a 216-patient diabetic ulcer trial used “intramuscular and perilesional” injections,^[2] Korea’s registered PDRN drug Rejuvenex is injection-only with a wound-repair indication,^[12] and in the one mouse study comparing routes, the cream groups trailed the injection groups.^[6] A sunscreen delivers PDRN to the surface of your skin, which is a different proposition from delivering it under the skin with a needle.

Does PDRN sunscreen repair sun damage?

There is no study of PDRN in a sunscreen at all; our PubMed searches for PDRN with sunscreen, sun protection factor, and photoprotection each returned zero results in August 2026.^[23] The closest evidence is a single 28-day randomized trial of a 0.1% PDRN eye cream against retinol, with no placebo group and three of the five authors employed by cosmetic companies.^[3] The sunscreens in our table print Sodium DNA amounts between 0.05 ppb and 55,000 ppb, far below that trial’s 0.1%, which is 1,000,000 ppb. The sun-damage protection you can count on from these products comes from their UV filters.

Is PDRN always from salmon?

No. The drug-grade material is defined as coming from the sperm DNA of two fish, Oncorhynchus mykiss or Oncorhynchus keta.^[1] Cosmetic Sodium DNA is looser: the product’s retail listing on Daiso Mall describes the PDRN in its Glow sun essence as plant-derived, from wild-simulated ginseng,^[18] and recent industry-affiliated papers propose PDRN from peony^[9] and rose.^[10] The ingredient name on the label does not tell you the species, and most brands do not say.

We’re not doctors or dermatologists, and nothing here is medical advice. PDRN injections and polynucleotide procedures are medical treatments; decisions about them belong in a consultation room, not a sunscreen blog. If you have a wound that will not heal, that is a physician conversation, not an ingredient-list conversation.

Sources:
[1] Squadrito F, Bitto A, Irrera N, et al. Pharmacological Activity and Clinical Use of PDRN. Front Pharmacol. 2017;8:224. PMID 28491036. DOI 10.3389/fphar.2017.00224. Source for the definition quotes: “PDRN is a proprietary and registered drug that possesses several activities: tissue repairing, anti-ischemic, and anti-inflammatory,” the 50 to 1,500 kDa molecular weight range and the Oncorhynchus mykiss / Oncorhynchus keta sperm DNA origin, the adenosine A(2A) receptor mechanism sentence, and the “salvage pathway” term. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5405115/
[2] Squadrito F, Bitto A, Altavilla D, et al. The effect of PDRN, an adenosine receptor A2A agonist, on the healing of chronic diabetic foot ulcers: results of a clinical trial. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(5):E746-53. PMID 24483158. DOI 10.1210/jc.2013-3569. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 216 patients, 8 weeks. Source for the healing rates “18.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.4-26.3] of placebo and in 37.3% (95% CI 28.2-46.3) of PDRN-treated patients (P = .0027)” and for the delivery route, “intramuscular and perilesional route.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24483158/
[3] Ye R, Wang Q, Du L, Li L, Hu F. Topical medium-length PDRN enhances dermal extracellular matrix repair in photodamaged skin via PI3K-Akt/TGF-beta-regulated pathways. PLoS One. 2026;21(7):e0350905. PMID 42430369. PMCID PMC13353946. The only randomized topical human trial we found: “0.1% PDRN-850K eye cream with 0.1% retinol over 28 days,” split-face, “Thirty-one healthy Chinese female volunteers aged 35–55 years,” no vehicle/placebo arm. Source for the “approximately two-fold greater improvements” result, the skin penetration finding “beyond 20 μm into the superficial viable epidermis at 8–24 h,” and the conflict declaration “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.” Author affiliations in the MEDLINE record include the UNISKIN Research Institute on Skin Aging (Inertia Shanghai Biotechnology) and DermaHealth Shanghai Biotechnology (three of the five authors). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13353946/
[4] Lampridou S, Bassett S, Cavallini M, Christopoulos G. The Effectiveness of Polynucleotides in Esthetic Medicine: A Systematic Review. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025;24(2):e16721. PMID 39645667. Source for “Nine studies, of low and moderate quality, were included in this review, describing a population of 219 patients receiving PN treatment” and “Rigorous, high-quality studies are essential to validate the effectiveness and safety of PN.” The paper’s disclosure states one author is a Key Opinion Leader and clinical trainer for Dermafocus Ltd., a distributor of Mastelli polynucleotide medical devices. This review concerns polynucleotides (PN), the wider family; we do not relabel its findings as PDRN-specific. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39645667/
[5] Flores Rodriguez JC, et al. PDRN in Post-procedure Recovery in Aesthetic Medicine: A Narrative Review. Cureus. 2026;18(5):e108886. PMID 42299173. Source for the paired evidence-and-limitations sentences quoted in full in the text. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42299173/
[6] Lee JH, et al. Comparison of wound healing effects between Oncorhynchus keta-derived PDRN and Oncorhynchus mykiss-derived PDRN. Arch Craniofac Surg. 2018;19(1):20-34. PMID 29609429. Mouse full-thickness wound study, n=60. Source for the route comparison: “The wound healing effects were the greatest in the O. keta-derived PDRN injection and O. mykiss-derived PDRN injection groups, which showed similar scores, followed by the O. keta-derived cream and normal saline soaked dressing groups.” Animal data; we do not extend it to humans. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29609429/
[7] Noh TK, et al. Novel Anti-Melanogenesis Properties of Polydeoxyribonucleotide, a Popular Wound Healing Booster. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(9):1448. PMID 27598132. Source for the practice observation that PDRN “is popularly used for faster healing of cutaneous wounds and boosting of neocollagenesis of photoaged skin among current dermatologic practitioners” (the authors’ description, which we do not convert into a prevalence statistic) and for the six-patient intradermal injection series. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27598132/
[8] Jeon S, et al. Mechanical stress-driven conformational compaction of PDRN for enhanced transdermal regenerative therapy. Biomater Sci. 2026;14(15):3995-4005. PMID 42325101. Source for “Biomacromolecular therapeutics face critical size-dependent transdermal delivery limitations that restrict their clinical effectiveness.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42325101/
[9] Bak SU, et al. Anti-Aging Efficacy of Low-Molecular-Weight PDRN Derived from Paeonia lactiflora. Int J Mol Sci. 2025;27(1):220. PMID 41516097. Source for “Paeonia lactiflora-derived PDRN (Peony PDRN) is proposed as a plant-based alternative to salmon-derived PDRN.” The paper discloses that six authors were employed by NewLife BST. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41516097/
[10] Cavagnino A, et al. Study of rose-derived PDRN. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2025;47(12). PMID 41614736. Cited as evidence that rose-derived PDRN is under active industry research; authors include L’Oréal affiliations. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41614736/
[11] Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (Korea), Regulation on Review of Functional Cosmetics, Annex 4: functional cosmetic ingredient types exempt from data submission. PDF read directly on 2026-08-23. Our text searches of the document for DNA, deoxyribonucleotide, PDRN, and nucleic-acid terms returned no entries; the annex lists adenosine 0.04% (wrinkle category) and niacinamide 2 to 5% (brightening category), along with the approved UV filter table. https://www.law.go.kr/LSW/flDownload.do?flSeq=133405543
[12] Nedrug (의약품안전나라), Ministry of Food and Drug Safety drug registry: Rejuvenex injection (리쥬비넥스주, polydeoxyribonucleotide sodium), Pharma Research. Prescription-only; 5.625 mg per 3 mL ampoule; indication and dosing translated by us from the registry entry (treatment of wounds from skin grafts and tissue repair; one ampoule daily by intramuscular or subcutaneous injection). https://nedrug.mfds.go.kr/pbp/CCBBB01/getItemDetailCache?cacheSeq=201500071aupdateTs2024-09-03+14:17:20.050816b
[13] Mastelli S.r.l., Dermatology area (official manufacturer page). Source for the Placentex product forms including the “0,08% cream” and the description of PDRN as “a pharmaceutical active ingredient.” We cite the manufacturer’s percentage label only; a milligram figure circulating on pharmacy pages conflicts with it, so we do not use one. https://www.mastelli.com/therapeutic-areas/dermatology-area
[14] INCIDecoder ingredient page: Sodium DNA. Official function “Skin conditioning”; chemical name “Deoxyribonucleic Acid, Sodium Salts.” The site’s URL for a polydeoxyribonucleotide ingredient page returns a 404; no cosmetic INCI name PDRN exists. https://inkeedecoder.com/ingredients/sodium-dna
[15] Medicube PDRN Pink Tone Up Sun Cream SPF50+ PA++++. Ingredient positions counted from the INCIDecoder listing (58 ingredients, Sodium DNA #58, printed “Sodium Dna (0.05 Ppb)”), cross-checked against Medicube’s official Korean product page (“소듐디엔에이(0.05 ppb)”) and StyleKorean’s product description (“Formulated with Sodium DNA (PDRN) at 0.05 ppb”). All read 2026-08-23. https://inkeedecoder.com/products/medicube-pdrn-pink-tone-up-sun-cream-spf50-pa · https://themedicube.co.kr/product/detail.html?product_no=2196&cate_no=760&display_group=1 · https://www.stylekorean.com/product/medicube-pdrn-pink-tone-up-sun-cream-50ml/1755068645
[16] Dr.G Skin Boost PDRN Sun Serum. INCIDecoder listing: 46 ingredients, Sodium DNA #40, printed “Sodium Dna (55,000 Ppb).” YesStyle’s ingredient list for the same product: 47 entries, Sodium DNA #40, no ppb figure, minor ordering differences (a listing-version gap). The ppb figure is therefore single-source and labeled as such in our tables. Read 2026-08-23. https://inkeedecoder.com/products/dr-g-skin-boost-pdrn-sun-serum · https://www.yesstyle.com/en/dr-g-skin-boost-pdrn-sun-serum-50ml/info.html/pid.1137364903
[17] SNP PDRN Ectoin UV Aging Recovery Sun Serum SPF50+ PA++++. INCIDecoder listing: 61 ingredients, Sodium DNA #19 printed “Sodium Dna (1 Ppb),” Ectoin #38 printed at 1,000 ppb. Single-source figures. Read 2026-08-23. https://inkeedecoder.com/products/snp-pdrn-ectoin-uv-aging-recovery-sun-serum-spf50-pa
[18] VT PDRN Glow Sun Essence SPF50+ PA+++. INCIDecoder listing: 50 ingredients, Sodium DNA #17 printed “Sodium Dna (5 Ppb)” (single-source figure). The Daiso Mall official retail page describes the product’s PDRN as plant PDRN extracted from wild-simulated ginseng (“산양삼에서 추출한 저분자 식물성 PDRN”; our translation). Read 2026-08-23. https://inkeedecoder.com/products/vt-cosmetics-vt-pdrn-glow-sun-essence-spf50-pa · https://www.daisomall.co.kr/pd/pdr/SCR_PDR_0001?pdNo=1067497
[19] VT PDRN Moist Tone Up Sun Essence. INCIDecoder listing: 54 ingredients, Sodium DNA #43, no declared amount. Read 2026-08-23. https://inkeedecoder.com/products/vt-pdrn-moist-tone-up-sun-essence
[20] Medicube PDRN Hydrating Sun Serum. Korean version: Medicube official page, 49 ingredients, Sodium DNA #39, no declared amount. US version (“No Cast Just Dew PDRN Hydrating UV Serum SPF 50+”): skinsort listing with OTC active filters PBSA 2.5%, homosalate 5%, ethylhexyl salicylate 4.5%, octocrylene 5%, and Sodium DNA #36 of 38 inactive ingredients; a different formula from the Korean one. Read 2026-08-23. https://themedicube.co.kr/product/detail.html?product_no=2728&cate_no=760&display_group=1 · https://skinsort.com/products/medicube/no-cast-just-dew-pdrn-hydrating-uv-serm-spf-50
[21] pdrn.care, “Best PDRN Sunscreens in 2026: Protect and Repair in One Step” (byline Dr. Sarah Chen, 2026-04-27). Source of the marketing claims quoted and examined in the text: “a meaningful PDRN concentration positioned high in the ingredient list” and “the UV filters block the majority of radiation, while the PDRN simultaneously activates repair mechanisms for the small percentage that penetrates.” Quoted as claims, not as evidence. https://pdrn.care/learn/blog/best-pdrn-sunscreens-2026/
[22] Gabriella Sebestyen MD, koreanskincarecoach.com: “How to Use PDRN for Real Results: A Doctor’s Honest Take” (2025-10-14), source for “Scientific evidence for topical PDRN is limited” and the fibroblast-depth sentence quoted in the text; and “Top Skincare Trends for 2026” (2026-02-14), source for the “supportive buffer” description. Quoted as one dermatologist’s published opinion. https://www.koreanskincarecoach.com/blog/how-to-use-pdrn-for-real-results-a-doctors-honest-take · https://www.koreanskincarecoach.com/blog/top-skincare-trends-for-2026-and-the-ingredients-driving-the-shift
[23] Search record, PubMed E-utilities esearch, run by us on 2026-08-23. Queries and result counts: “polydeoxyribonucleotide sunscreen” 0; “polydeoxyribonucleotide sun protection factor” 0; “polydeoxyribonucleotide photoprotection” 0; for scale, “polydeoxyribonucleotide review” 190 and “PDRN topical skin” 7, of which one is the randomized eye cream trial in reference [3]. Zero counts are searches, not proofs; a study we could not find could still exist outside PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

Topics: Clinical Evidence · Ingredient Lists · Layering with Actives · Niacinamide · PA / UVA Rating · Sun Serum · All topics