Skip to content

White Petrolatum

  • Prescription medicine
  • Prescription only
  • Identity checked
  • Sources last checked 2026-09-04

This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.

What White Petrolatum does in the body

helps protect chapped skin

Why people take it. helps protect chapped skin

What happened in people

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

A fixed RNAWiki sentence

Where this came from

Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.

No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.

No source is stored against this line.

The limit that matters most

Not recorded.

Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.

What the registries record it as

  • The substance registry classes this as structurallydiverse.

    FDA substance registry · B6E5W8RQJ4 · read 2026-08-29

  • The material is recorded as coming from hydrocarbons.

    FDA substance registry · B6E5W8RQJ4 · read 2026-08-29

Where each sentence above came from

The use the label states, quoted from it. No plain-language version of this sentence has been written.

The use the label states, quoted from it. It is written for a clinician, not for a reader without medical training.

No statement of the main limit is recorded.

The four opening statements run to 21 words.

Words this page uses

Four words worth knowing first

Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.

Protein

A protein is a folded chain your body builds to do a specific job.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A protein is like a tool bent into one shape for one task.

Where that stops being true. A tool keeps its shape. A protein can change shape and stop working.

What people get wrong. Protein in food and a protein in the body are related but not the same thing.

A polymer of amino acids folded into a defined structure that determines its function.

Enzyme

An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.

Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.

What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.

A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.

Receptor

A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.

Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.

What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.

A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.

Pathway

A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A pathway is like a row of dominoes.

Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.

What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.

An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What was measured, goal by goal

One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.

Registered studies list 35 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.

There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.

Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
GoalLife outcomeWhat a body can doHow a person feelsA test resultA step in the bodyHarmsHow longWho was studied
PainNothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.Waiting for a reviewer1 registered symptom measure.Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Pain
pain severity

Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.

What each mark on this table means
Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
Waiting for a reviewer
1 registered symptom measure.
Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What happened in people

Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.

Cumulative incidence of atopic dermatitis at 1 year of age

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT07333378
How many people
1383
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Topical

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

The development of a photocontact allergic skin response to sunscreen filters and topical NSAIDs, as graded by the ICDRG scale.

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT00530387
How many people
1000
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Topical

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Three weeks after application of the intervention, blood will be drawn from those enrolled in the control group.

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT00162747
How many people
600
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Topical

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Post-operative wound infection

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT01773694
How many people
507
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Topical

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Number of Participants With Surgical Site Infections

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT03199911
How many people
401
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Topical

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Cumulative incidence of children with atopic dermatitis at 6 months of age

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT04398758
How many people
360
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Topical

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

How close this is to real life

The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.

  1. Living longer, or avoiding a major event No evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
  2. What a body can do day to day No evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
  3. Measured performance No evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
  4. Symptoms and quality of life Evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.1 registered measure of this kind.
  5. A number that stands in for health No evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
  6. A step measured inside a person Evidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
  7. Animals Evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in C. elegans (roundworm), Drosophila (fruit fly), Mouse, Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
  8. Cells in a dish Evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
  9. A guess from software No evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.

Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Felt, measured, or meaningful

Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.

Felt

Things a person could notice without a test.

  • pain severity

Measured

Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.

No registered study measured anything of this kind.

Meaningful

Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.

No registered study measured anything of this kind.

A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.

Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.

Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.

Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.

Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.

Names that fit none of the three (34)
  • eczema area and severity index scores according to location
  • overall number of line related infections
  • wound area
  • repigmentation of pa lesions measured by colorimetry
  • skin thickness from baseline to end of treatment
  • scar thickness measured by digital calliper
  • tewl
  • appearance of xerosis
  • underglove failure rate compared between all competitors
  • eyebrow excursion
  • skin capacitance
  • il 1
  • srrc
  • keloid surface area
  • psoriasis area severity index
  • change on pathology level
  • nf b expression
  • psoriasis severity
  • epigenetic markers
  • reduction of 60 in viral load from baseline

These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Were people like you studied?

RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.

Who was studied

People similar to this profile were included.

  • • Helps treat and prevent diaper rash • Temporarily protects minor: •Cuts •Scrapes • Burns • Temporarily helps protect and helps relieve chapped and cracked skin or lips • Helps prevent and protect from the drying effects of wind and cold weather • Helps prevent and protect from chafed skin or minor skin irritations associated with diaper rash

Who is missing from the studies

  • Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.

Where the result stopped carrying

  • This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
  • It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.

RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Why it might seem to do nothing

A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.

It was studied for a different goal

The studies measured something else entirely.

On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.

It was studied in different people

The people in the studies were not much like the reader.

On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.

The evidence may simply be wrong

Small early studies often do not hold up.

On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.

None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What taking it involves

The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.

How it is supplied

Prescription only

Quoted from a source

Where this came from

Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.

Read from the recorded approval status.

No source is stored against this line.

Form and route

Topical

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

The form and route recorded on this substance.

No source is stored against this line.

Who oversees it

RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.

Quoted from a source

Where this came from

Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.

No register row and no identity class settled the question.

No source is stored against this line.

What is in the pack

Sold as ointment, cream, stick, salve, given by the topical, ophthalmic route.

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.

No source is stored against this line.

Where it is registered

Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.

Counted from records

Where this came from

A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.

Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.

No source is stored against this line.

Why people stop

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.

No source is stored against this line.

What it would be like to takeNothing found in the sources checked

What can go wrong

Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.

Nothing found in the sources checked

No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.

The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.

Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.

Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Does the exact form matter?

Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.

The form that was studied

Topical

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

The form used in the studies cited on this page.

No source is stored against this line.

What is sold

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.

No source is stored against this line.

What is recorded as being sold

  • 94 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 50 of them contain it and nothing else.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 80684-210 · read 2026-08-29

  • They are sold as cream, gel, jelly, ointment, paste and salve, taken ophthalmic and topical.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 80684-210 · read 2026-08-29

  • 176 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 133 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.

    US prescribing information · d7068e2b-c3b2-d16d-e053-2a95a90a6dd2 · read 2026-08-29

  • Those labels are classed as human otc drug.

    US prescribing information · d7068e2b-c3b2-d16d-e053-2a95a90a6dd2 · read 2026-08-29

Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What you could measure

This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.

RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.

Questions worth asking

  • Which of the trials of White Petrolatum studied people like me?
  • What was measured, and for how long?
  • Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
  • What would we watch for, and when would we stop?

Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.

RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What nobody knows yet

Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.

How much did people take in the studies?

The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.

Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.

What would answer it

A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

How fast does the body clear it?

The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.

Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.

What would answer it

A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Missing populations

Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Missing long-term data

No completed tested study window is recorded.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

No reviewed conclusion

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Missing interaction studies

No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Formulation uncertainty

Several salts, forms or products of White Petrolatum are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Mechanism not reviewed

No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Check any of this yourself

Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.

Where else this substance is registered

FDA substance identifier (UNII)
B6E5W8RQJ4
CAS registry number
8009-03-8
ChEMBL
CHEMBL1201719
EMA substance identifier
100000079000

Checks this page had to pass

  • Passed

    Identity resolved

    no open identity hold

  • Passed

    No unresolved merge across substance families

    no quarantine open

  • Passed

    Every public sentence names a source

    The opening statement carries the origin: Quoted from a stored source.

  • Not passed

    Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence

    No registered study is classified as testing this substance.

  • Passed

    No internal keys in reader text

    enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page

  • Not passed

    Safety mode resolved

    No register row and no identity class settled the question.

  • Passed

    Canonical metadata present

    slug and display name present

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

How this medicine reached us

Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.

What the approval register records

  • 1 approved application covers products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA021026, approved 20060216 to MYLAN.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA021026 · read 2026-08-29

  • Marketing status on the register: prescription.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA021026 · read 2026-08-29

  • The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20160926.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 80684-210 · read 2026-08-29

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What to learn next

Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.

This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.

What is not here

6 questions this page could not answer

These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.

  • The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.

The record as stored

The full record, for auditing

Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.

Recorded evidence blocks (10)

What did White Petrolatum's largest trial (3507 people) and its longest (15 years) measure?


3507 people in White Petrolatum's largest registered study, 15 years in its longest registered window, measuring Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)Scores According to Location. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

13 na, 8 phase1, 8 phase2, 6 phase4, 3 early phase1, 3 phase3; NCT02577120; 2034-02. Last human test completed 2025, NCT07739355.

Interpretation These counts include studies where White Petrolatum was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.

Show the evidence
  • na
    13
  • phase1
    8
  • phase2
    8
  • phase4
    6
  • early phase1
    3
  • phase3
    3
1 more recorded row
  • Last recorded human test NCT07739355
    2025-12-11

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

From C. elegans to human: where has White Petrolatum shown lifespan?


C. elegans: lifespan, Drosophila: lifespan, mouse: mechanism-only, rat: mechanism-only and human: mechanism-only (38): the rungs where White Petrolatum has a recorded finding. Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov · organism ladder · 2026-09-01

Interpretation Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)Scores According to Location — the recorded outcome words.

Yeast C. elegans lifespanDrosophila lifespanMouse mechanism-onlyRat mechanism-onlyDog Non-human primate Human mechanism-only
Show the evidence
  • C. elegans
    lifespan
  • Drosophila
    lifespan
  • mouse
    mechanism-only
  • rat
    mechanism-only
  • human NCT00179959
    mechanism-only; Change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)Scores According to Location; 38

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

7 of White Petrolatum's trials stopped: futility/efficacy, accrual/recruitment, funding/business, other?


futility/efficacy (1), accrual/recruitment (2), funding/business (2) and other (2): White Petrolatum's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

"Change of practice to antibiotic impregnated catheters and large study published showing their efficacy. Made topical antibiotics obselete."; 7 of 38 registered studies

Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT00990392
    withdrawn; "Change of practice to antibiotic impregnated catheters and large study published showing their efficacy. Made topical antibiotics obselete."
  • NCT01315951
    terminated; "PI Ryan D Stevenson left Organization (Genesys) prior to Ascension acquiring record; no evidence of completion"
  • NCT02534129
    terminated; "Insufficient dermatitis was seen in the controls to allow any determination of protection by Difinsa53"
  • NCT04329221
    withdrawn; "The study was withdrawn due to lack of financial support."
  • NCT04642287
    withdrawn; "The study was withdrawn due to lack of financial support."
  • NCT04851522
    withdrawn; "Lack of patient accrual in the past year."
  • 1 further recorded trial NCT05312645
    withdrawn; "No Subjects Enrolled"

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Did White Petrolatum move Horvath, and by how much?


Horvath: "PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus were searched from inception to 7 April 2026 for English-language observational and interventional studies reporting quantitative associations between modifiable determinants and EAA measured using validated clocks (Horvath, PhenoAge, GrimAge, DunedinPACE)." Europe PMC · epigenetic clock search · 2026-06-02

2 recorded sentences; 2026; biomarker

Show the evidence
  • Horvath PMID 42278556
    2026; "PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus were searched from inception to 7 April 2026 for English-language observational and interventional studies reporting quantitative associations between modifiable determinants and EAA measured using validated clocks (Horvath, PhenoAge, GrimAge, DunedinPACE)."
  • epigenetic clock PMID 41756167
    2026; "A systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase was conducted from inception through August 2025 for observational studies in adults assessing validated BA measures (phenotypic age, Klemera-Doubal method, Homeostatic Dysregulation, epigenetic clocks, telomere length) and MASLD outcomes."

recorded 2026-06-02 · last checked 2026-09-04

Could one person measure White Petrolatum's effect on eczema area and severity index scores according to location?


Eczema area and severity index scores according to location: measured in White Petrolatum's trials.

Interpretation eczema area and severity index scores according to location is the recorded endpoint.

Show the evidence

biomarkers

  • eczema area and severity index scores according to location; 2026-09-01
  • overall number of line related infections; 2026-09-01
  • wound area; 2026-09-01
  • repigmentation of pa lesions measured by colorimetry; 2026-09-01
  • skin thickness from baseline to end of treatment; 2026-09-01
  • scar thickness measured by digital calliper; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
  • biomarkers
    tewl; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    appearance of xerosis; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    underglove failure rate compared between all competitors; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    eyebrow excursion; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    skin capacitance; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    il 1; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    srrc; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    keloid surface area; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    psoriasis area severity index; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    change on pathology level; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    nf b expression; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    psoriasis severity; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    epigenetic markers; 2026-09-01
  • biomarkers
    reduction of 60 in viral load from baseline; 2026-09-01
  • human trials at or under30
    17
  • Not recorded for this substance
    a recorded half-life
  • smallest human trial
    0; NCT00990392; NA; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN

Which of 5 d pruritus scale, adverse events and appearance of xerosis did White Petrolatum's trials measure?


5 d pruritus scale, adverse events and appearance of xerosis lead 35 outcome terms across White Petrolatum's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

Interpretation repigmentation of pa lesions measured by colorimetry, skin thickness from baseline to end of treatment, scar thickness measured by digital calliper, tewl, appearance of xerosis and underglove failure rate compared between all competitors follow.

Show the evidence
  • eczema area and severity index scores according to location
    1
  • overall number of line related infections
    1
  • wound area
    1
  • repigmentation of pa lesions measured by colorimetry
    1
  • skin thickness from baseline to end of treatment
    1
  • scar thickness measured by digital calliper
    1
14 more recorded rows
  • tewl
    1
  • appearance of xerosis
    1
  • underglove failure rate compared between all competitors
    1
  • eyebrow excursion
    1
  • skin capacitance
    1
  • il 1
    1
  • srrc
    1
  • keloid surface area
    1
  • psoriasis area severity index
    1
  • change on pathology level
    1
  • nf b expression
    1
  • psoriasis severity
    1
  • epigenetic markers
    1
  • reduction of 60 in viral load from baseline
    1

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which of White Petrolatum's 4 ongoing trials reports first?


4 registered trials of White Petrolatum are open; earliest completion 2025-10. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

TEWL; Transepidermal water loss; latest 2034-02

Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT02577120
    "Wound Healing Endpoint and Recurrence"; n 100; "TEWL"; 2034-02
  • NCT07183423
    "Novel Skin Barrier Product Versus Petrolatum for Skin Barrier Dysfunction"; n 26; "Transepidermal water loss"; 2025-10
  • NCT07408960
    "CO2Lift and T-Junction Breakdown Rates Evaluation After Breast Reduction Surgery Pilot Trial"; n 10; "Recruitment Rate"; 2027-12-31
  • NCT07531472
    "Outcome of Hyaluronic Acid Gel Versus Petroleum Jelly in Treatment of Epistaxis"; n 50; "To compare the recurrence rate of epistaxis between the two groups"; 2028-06-01

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which 16 trials of White Petrolatum posted no result?


Posted no result
16 of 16 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00743990, NCT01388517, NCT01494714, NCT02084472, NCT01935869 and NCT01731756, and 10 more
Completion dates
oldest 2010-03; newest 2024-03-27
Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT00743990
    2010-03
  • NCT01388517
    2011-01
  • NCT01494714
    2011-09
  • NCT02084472
    2013-07
  • NCT01935869
    2013-12
  • NCT01731756
    2014-03
10 further recorded trials
  • NCT02355639
    2015-04
  • NCT02487212
    2015-05
  • NCT03502434
    2017-11-17
  • NCT03093597
    2017-12-12
  • NCT03916250
    2019-05-12
  • NCT02967432
    2019-12
  • NCT04951349
    2021-05-30
  • NCT05353374
    2021-05-31
  • NCT03344354
    2022-10-26
  • NCT06475482
    2024-03-27

At the median, White Petrolatum's trials enrolled 38 people — anything larger?


Median enrolment
38
Largest enrolment
3507
Registered trials counted
38

What is recorded about White Petrolatum and sirtuin?


"Visceral adipose tissue (VAT) operates as an autonomous neuro-immune-endocrine organ whose dysfunctional expansion drives insulin resistance, atherogenesis, and accelerated cellular ageing through mechanisms converging on chronic low-grade sterile inflammation, referred to as inflammaging. <b>Objectives:</b> This narrative review…" — where White Petrolatum and sirtuin appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-07-29

sirtuin, NAD+; PMID 42646271

Show the evidence
  • sirtuin PMID 42646271
    "Visceral adipose tissue (VAT) operates as an autonomous neuro-immune-endocrine organ whose dysfunctional expansion drives insulin resistance, atherogenesis, and accelerated cellular ageing through mechanisms converging on chronic low-grade sterile inflammation, referred to as inflammaging. <b>Objectives:</b> This narrative review integrates evidence across four domains: (1) the multi-system…"
  • NAD+ PMID 42646271
    "Visceral adipose tissue (VAT) operates as an autonomous neuro-immune-endocrine organ whose dysfunctional expansion drives insulin resistance, atherogenesis, and accelerated cellular ageing through mechanisms converging on chronic low-grade sterile inflammation, referred to as inflammaging. <b>Objectives:</b> This narrative review integrates evidence across four domains: (1) the multi-system…"

recorded 2026-07-29 · last checked 2026-09-04

Where it is registered
Identifiers, relations and other names

The exact record

ChEMBL id
CHEMBL1201719
CAS number
8009-03-8
Also called
PETROLATUM, WHITE, PARAFFINUM ALBUM [WHO-IP LATIN], PETROLATUM, WHITE [ORANGE BOOK], PETROLATUM,WHITE [VANDF], WHITE PETROLATUM [JAN], WHITE PETROLATUM [NF], WHITE PETROLATUM [USP MONOGRAPH], WHITE, SOFT PARAFFIN [WHO-IP], White soft paraffin [WHO-DD]
Trade name
Petrolatum, white component of vusion, White petrolatum component of vusion, Petroleum Jelly, Vitamin A and D, Medline, Chapstick Classic Original, Carmex Classic Lip Balm Medicated Triple Force Formula, Chapstick Classic Cherry, ClaraVie, PETROLEUM, ProCure Petroleum, ChapStick Classic Spearmint
Salt form
Crash Cream, PETROLATUM, BABY PETROLEUM JELLY, WHITE PETROLATUM JELLY, LIP BALM SKIN PROTECTANT, SKIN PROTECTANT LIP BALM, WHITE PETROLATUM 93.4%
Sources (7)

Sources

1 more source

ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md

How these records are assembled · Which registers were checked

Index-quality checks
  • identity passed: no open identity hold
  • required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
  • public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
  • source coverage passed: 7 source rows
  • no critical contamination: no quarantine open
  • canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
  • no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page

This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.