PDRN in Skincare: Questions to Ask Before Choosing an Ingredient

A development brief asks for a PDRN serum. Before choosing a supplier or setting an ingredient percentage, the team needs to translate that request into something it can evaluate: a defined raw material, a proposed cosmetic benefit and evidence relevant to the finished product.

PDRN refers to polydeoxyribonucleotide. The abbreviation alone does not give a formulator a complete purchasing specification. Research can involve specifically processed materials, while commercial ingredients have their own composition and handling instructions.¹² The following questions provide a practical structure for reviewing a candidate.

Establish exactly what the supplier is selling

Begin with the manufacturer’s product code, trade name, declared INCI composition and current specification. Keep these as separate fields in the ingredient record so a trade description cannot quietly become the identity used for every other purpose.

For example, Uniproma identifies one of its PDRN grades with the INCI name Sodium DNA and describes it as a powder. That is information about that particular grade. It does not establish that every material marketed with PDRN in its name has the same composition or properties.¹

Ask what proportion of the supplied material is the component of interest, what method measures it, and how the supplier describes its source and processing. If a molecular-size profile is part of the proposed rationale, request the actual measurement and method. Record whether a document describes the commercial ingredient, a research preparation or a finished formula.

Build a dossier that answers the development questions

A collection of brochures becomes more useful when each document has a defined purpose. Request technical and safety information appropriate to the material, then record which questions remain unanswered.

Use this suggested supplier checklist:

• What is the complete composition, including carriers and other intentionally added components?

• Which identity, purity and relevant contaminant specifications apply to the purchased grade?

• Is a certificate of analysis available for the actual supplied lot?

• What storage, handling, processing and compatibility guidance applies?

• Which studies used this grade, and what were their methods and limitations?

• How will changes to the material or its specification be communicated?

For EU product safety documentation, the Commission’s Annex I guidance calls for clear ingredient identification and characterisation of relevant properties, including composition and pertinent purity information.³ The questions above are a suggested working checklist, to be adapted with the safety assessor and supplier.

Assign each missing item an owner and a next action. A note reading “technical data requested” should also tell a colleague which data, from whom, and what decision depends on receiving it.

Match the evidence to the intended cosmetic claim

Read beyond the study headline. Identify the material, dose, delivery route, test system, comparator, duration and outcome. A useful evidence table can then show whether the study addresses the proposed ingredient, formulation and use conditions.

A 2025 paper by Park and colleagues investigated plasma-treated PDRN using physicochemical characterisation and laboratory experiments. Its reported comparisons concern that processing approach and the tested systems. They cannot, by themselves, establish the performance of every PDRN serum on the market.²

Apply the same reasoning to other evidence. Findings from injection, damaged tissue or a cell culture need a justified connection before they support a claim for a cosmetic applied to intact skin. Also separate evidence for an ingredient from evidence for the complete formula. If a tested serum contains several potentially relevant ingredients, ask what the study design allows the team to attribute to PDRN specifically.

Review the proposed wording with the regulatory team early. FDA identifies intended use as central to the cosmetic versus drug distinction and gives cell-regeneration claims as an example that can establish drug intent.⁴

Plan the formulation work around the chosen grade

Obtain the supplier’s current instructions for the actual material before deciding when and how to add it. For the example grade above, the manufacturer’s page gives water solubility and storage guidance. Those details should remain attached to that grade’s record.¹

Turn the instructions into development questions: does the intended process fit the stated guidance, which compatibility questions need experimental work, and what measurements will support the formulation decision? Avoid applying one supplier’s use range or handling limit to all PDRN materials.

Create a named trial formula and record the raw-material lot, amount added, process and observations. When making a comparison, explain what was held constant and what changed. Otherwise, a better-feeling prototype may be attributed to the ingredient even though the base, processing or packaging also changed.

An illustrative comparison: the same addition rate, different composition

Illustrative example: a team compares two fictional ingredients. Grade A is documented as a 1% solution of the component of interest. Grade B is documented as a 10% solution. Both are added to separate prototypes at 1% by weight.

On those assumptions, the resulting concentrations are 0.01% and 0.1% respectively. The equal raw-material addition rates produce a tenfold difference in the specified component. The carriers may differ too.

The appropriate next step is to define the comparison the team actually wants. It might compare finished-product performance at equivalent component concentrations, or evaluate each supplier’s recommended application approach. Either design needs its own rationale. Matching a concentration also does not establish equivalent identity, safety or performance.

Keep the supplier documents and calculation with the trial record. A later reviewer should be able to see why the comparison was designed that way without relying on the formulator’s memory.

Preserve the selection decision

End the review with a decision and its scope: approved for specified development work, accepted for a defined formula, or awaiting further information. Record the reviewer, date, supporting evidence and outstanding conditions. Keep unresolved claims questions visible to the people writing the product copy.

When using an ingredient database, check whether searches by INCI, trade name and CAS number lead to the relevant specifications and supporting documents. These are useful starting points for candidate identification and document gathering.

The review itself should explain why this material was selected for this product. Link that reasoning to the formula and the studies that follow. When a supplier changes the material, or the brand changes its intended claim, the team then has a clear starting point for reassessment.

Sources