JP2008156288A - Composition for oral cavity - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a composition for an oral cavity, having low irritation, excellent in biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect in the oral cavity, and useful for the prevention or treatment of oral cavity diseases such as periodontal disease, etc. <P>SOLUTION: This composition for the oral cavity contains (A) a hardened castor oil with a polyoxyethylene having 40 to 100 mean number of added moles of ethylene oxide, (B) dihydroxyethyllaurylamine oxide, (C) at least 1 kind selected from cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride and benzalkonium chloride, and also has 1.0 to 20 mass ratio of (A)/(B). <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2008,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to an oral composition having low mucosal irritation and excellent antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect on biofilm in the oral cavity.

  In recent years, dental plaque has been regarded as a biofilm (Non-Patent Document 1), and bacteria in the oral biofilm have a bacterial protein expression pattern (Non-Patent Documents 2 and 3) and drug resistance ( Non-patent documents 4 and 5) are greatly different, and it has become clear that the drugs and combinations proposed so far are not effective for biofilms.

  So far, phenolic fungicides (Patent Document 1) and the like have been developed as sterilizing means. However, since bacteria in biofilm have a strong drug resistance mechanism, this alone is insufficient in biofilm suppression effect. It was difficult to eliminate the risk of oral disease.

  Further, in order to enhance these bactericidal powers, a technique for improving the retention of bactericides (Patent Document 2) has been proposed, but due to the low drug permeability of biofilms, a significant effect could not be expected. From this current situation, there has been a strong demand for the development of a biofilm inhibitory composition that is effective against bacteria in oral biofilms.

  In recent years, as a biofilm suppressing composition, a combination of a hydrophobic amino acid and an ammonium salt (Patent Document 3), a composition of a substance that controls an inter-bacterial information transmission mechanism of a plaque-constituting microorganism (Patent Document 4), a lactone derivative and / or a furan derivative (Patent Document 5), glycerol phosphate and phenolic fungicide (Patent Document 6), nonionic antibacterial agent and dicarboxylic acid compound (Patent Document 7), ofloxacin, closantel and phenolic fungicide Formulation (Patent Document 8) and the like have been proposed.

  However, these technologies have problems such as being difficult to adsorb on the biofilm on the tongue with different bacterial flora and exhibiting a strong action on the oral mucosa. The thing which has an effect and a tongue coating removal effect has not been confirmed, and it has not been introduced into the market yet. Under such circumstances, there is a strong demand for the development of a composition that has both low irritation and antibacterial biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect in place of the above technique.

Costerton, J.M. W. , Stewart, P .; S. and Greenberg, E .; P. : Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent indications. Science 284: 1318-1322, 1999. Costerton, J.M. W. Lewandowski, Z .; Caldwell, D .; E. Korber, D .; R. and Lappin-Scott, H .; M.M. : Microbiological biofilms. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 49: 711-745, 1995. Hudson, M.M. C. Curtiss, R .; III: Regulation of expression of Streptococcus mutans genes important to virus. Infect. Immun. 58: 464-470, 1990. Stewart, P.M. S. : Mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in bacterial biofilms. Int. J. et al. Med. Microbiol. 292: 107-113, 2002. Philip Marsh and Michael V. Martin "Oral Microbiology", Wright Publishing, 2000, p. 58-81 (Dental plaque) JP 02-11511 A JP 04-139119 A JP 2002-370953 A JP 2003-128580 A JP 2004-155681 A JP 2005-047855 A JP 2005-015369 A JP 2005-187377 A JP 2000-154112 A JP 2006-137679 A

  This invention is made | formed in view of the said situation, and it aims at providing the composition for oral cavity which is hypoallergenic and has the outstanding antibacterial biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect.

  As a result of intensive studies to achieve the above object, the present inventor has (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average addition mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100, (B) dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide, ( C) By blending at least one cationic antibacterial agent selected from cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride, and benzalkonium chloride, and having a mass ratio of (A) / (B) of 1.0 to 20, It has been found for the first time that an oral composition that exhibits an extremely high biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect and exhibits extremely low irritation.

  In addition, although polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil and dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide are described as a component which can be selected, for example in patent documents 9 and 10, the composition for oral cavity of this invention is said (A)-(C ) Due to the synergistic action of these components in combination with specific ratios of the components, there is almost no strong irritation to the oral mucosa, and not only biofilms formed in the oral cavity, especially on the tooth surface, but also bacteria These components also adsorb to biofilms on the tongue with different flora, exhibiting excellent antibacterial effect, exhibiting excellent biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect with low irritation, periodontal disease, bad breath etc. It can effectively prevent or treat oral diseases, which is a new finding of the present inventor.

  Accordingly, the present invention provides (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100, (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide, (C) cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride, benzalkco chloride. An oral composition characterized by containing at least one cationic antibacterial agent selected from nickel and having a mass ratio of (A) / (B) of 1.0 to 20.

  The composition for oral cavity of the present invention is hypoallergenic, exhibits an excellent antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect on the biofilm in the oral cavity, and is useful for the prevention or treatment of oral diseases such as periodontal disease and bad breath.

  Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in more detail. The composition for oral cavity of the present invention comprises (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100, and (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide. And (C) at least one cationic antibacterial agent selected from cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride, and benzalkonium chloride.

  In the present invention, the average added mole number of ethylene oxide of (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil is essential to be 40 to 100, more preferably 80 to 100 from the viewpoint of the biofilm antibacterial effect. When the average added mole number of ethylene oxide in the polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil is less than 40, the biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect may be deteriorated, and those exceeding 100 are generally not commercially available. In addition, as such (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil, a commercial item can be used.

  The blending amount of (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil is preferably 0.1 to 1.8% (mass%, the same applies hereinafter) of the entire composition, more preferably 0.2 to 0.9%, and further. Preferably it is 0.3 to 0.6%. If the blending amount is less than 0.1%, a satisfactory mucosal irritation reducing effect may not be obtained, and if it exceeds 1.8%, the biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect may be adversely affected.

  Commercially available products can be used as (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide in the present invention, for example, Unisafe A-LE (trade name) manufactured by NOF Corporation.

  The blending amount of (B) dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide is preferably 0.01 to 0.5%, more preferably 0.04 to 0.25%, still more preferably 0.05 to 0.125 of the entire composition. %. If the blending amount is less than 0.01%, sufficient tongue coating removal effect may not be obtained, and if it exceeds 0.5%, mucosal irritation may be adversely affected.

  In the present invention, as the cationic antibacterial agent (C), it is essential to use at least one selected from cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride, and benzalkonium chloride. Among these, from the aspect of biofilm antibacterial effect and the like More preferably, cetylpyridinium chloride is used.

  (C) The compounding quantity with respect to the whole composition of a cationic antibacterial agent becomes like this. Preferably it is 0.01 to 0.1%, More preferably, it is 0.01 to 0.05%, More preferably, it is 0.03 to 0.05%. It is. When the blending amount is less than 0.01%, a sufficient biofilm antibacterial effect may not be obtained, and when it exceeds 0.1%, mucosal irritation may be adversely affected.

  In the present invention, it is essential to blend (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100 and (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide in a specific mass ratio. . The mass ratio is essential that (A) / (B) is 1.0 to 20, particularly preferably 2.0 to 15 in terms of hypoallergenicity, biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect. In particular, 3.0 to 10 is more preferable. When the mass ratio is less than 1.0 or exceeds 20, satisfactory hypoallergenicity, biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect may not be obtained.

  The oral composition of the present invention can be produced by a conventional method, and is prepared into a solid, solid, liquid, liquid, gel, paste, gum, etc. It can be prepared as a dentifrice, mouthwash, mouth freshener, interdental care agent, tongue care agent, etc. can do. For example, in the case of dentifrices, various abrasives, wetting agents, binders, surfactants, sweeteners, fragrances, coloring agents, preservatives, and other active ingredients are usually used within a range that does not interfere with the effects of the present invention. Can be used in quantities.

  For example, as a polishing agent, dicalcium phosphate dihydrate and anhydride, primary calcium phosphate, tertiary calcium phosphate, calcium carbonate, calcium pyrophosphate, aluminum hydroxide, alumina, anhydrous silicic acid, aluminum silicate, insoluble metaphosphoric acid One or more of sodium, tribasic magnesium phosphate, magnesium carbonate, calcium sulfate, polymethyl methacrylate, bentonite, zirconium silicate and the like can be blended (the blending amount is 5 to 55% in the case of dentifrice).

As the surfactant, in addition to the components (A) and (B), one or more of an anionic surfactant, a nonionic surfactant and a zwitterionic surfactant can be blended as the other surfactant. .
Examples of the anionic surfactant include sodium alkyl sulfate such as sodium lauryl sulfate, hydrogenated coconut fatty acid sodium monoglyceride monosulfate, sodium lauryl sulfoacetate, N-acyl glutamate such as sodium N-palmitoyl glutamate, N-methyl-N- Acyl taurine sodium, N-methyl-N-acylalanine sodium, sodium α-olefin sulfonate and the like are used.

Nonionic surfactants include sugar fatty acid esters such as sucrose fatty acid esters, maltose fatty acid esters, and lactose fatty acid esters, sugar alcohol fatty acid esters such as maltitol fatty acid esters and lactitol fatty acid esters, and polyoxyethylene sorbitan monolaurate. , Polyoxyethylene sorbitan fatty acid ester such as polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate, fatty acid diethanolamide such as lauric acid mono or diethanolamide, myristic acid mono or diethanolamide, sorbitan fatty acid ester, fatty acid monoglyceride, polyoxyethylene higher alcohol ether, Polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene copolymer, polyoxyethylene polyoxypropylene fatty acid ester, etc. are used. That.
As the zwitterionic surfactant, N-alkyldiaminoethylglycine such as N-myristyldiaminoethylglycine, N-alkyl-N-carboxymethylammonium betaine, sodium 2-alkyl-1-hydroxyethylimidazoline betaine and the like are used.

  The amount of the anionic surfactant, the nonionic surfactant and the zwitterionic surfactant as the other surfactants is preferably 0.1 to 3% based on the entire composition.

  As a binder, cellulose derivatives such as carrageenan, sodium carboxymethylcellulose, methylcellulose, hydroxyethylcellulose, sodium carboxymethylhydroxyethylcellulose, alginates, propylene glycol alginate, xanthan gum, tragacanth gum, karaya gum, gum arabic gum, polyvinyl alcohol, One or more kinds of synthetic binders such as sodium polyacrylate, carboxyvinyl polymer, and polyvinylpyrrolidone, and inorganic binders such as silica gel, aluminum silica gel, bee gum, and laponite can be blended (blending amount is usually 0.1-5) %).

  As the wetting agent, one or more of sorbit, glycerin, xylitol, maltitol, and lactitol can be blended (blending amount is usually 5 to 50%).

  Moreover, as alcohol, ethanol, isopropanol, butanol, propanol etc. are used as monohydric alcohol, and ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, hexylene glycol, butylene glycol, pentanediol, propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol 200 to 20,000, polypropylene as polyhydric alcohol. Glycol 300-4,000 etc. can be mentioned, These 1 or more types can be mix | blended. The total amount of the alcohol is usually 0.1 to 20% in terms of pure content.

As perfumes, peppermint oil, spearmint oil, anise oil, eucalyptus oil, winter green oil, cassia oil, clove oil, thyme oil, sage oil, lemon oil, orange oil, peppermint oil, cardamom oil, coriander oil, mandarin oil, lime Oil, lavender oil, rosemary oil, laurel oil, camomil oil, caraway oil, marjoram oil, bay oil, lemongrass oil, origanum oil, pine needle oil, neroli oil, rose oil, jasmine oil, iris concrete, absolute peppermint Natural fragrances such as absolute rose and orange flower, and fragrances processed with these natural fragrances (front reservoir cut, rear reservoir cut, fractional distillation, liquid-liquid extraction, essence, powder fragrance, etc.), and menthol , Carboxyl, Anethole, Cineol, Salicylic acid , Cinnamic aldehyde, eugenol, 3-l-mentoxypropane-1,2-diol, thymol, linalool, linalyl acetate, limonene, menthone, menthyl acetate, N-substituted-paramentane-3-carboxamide, pinene, octyl Aldehyde, citral, pulegone, carbyl acetate, anisaldehyde, ethyl acetate, ethyl butyrate, allyl cyclohexane propionate, methyl anthranilate, ethyl methyl phenyl glycidate, vanillin, undecalactone, hexanal, isoamyl alcohol, hexenol, Single flavors such as dimethyl sulfide, cycloten, furfural, trimethyl pyrazine, ethyl lactate, ethyl thioacetate, and strawberry flavor, Known fragrance materials used in oral compositions can be used, such as blended fragrances such as pullle flavor, banana flavor, pineapple flavor, grape flavor, mango flavor, butter flavor, milk flavor, fruit mix flavor, and tropical fruit flavor. It is not limited to the fragrance | flavor of an Example.
Moreover, although a compounding quantity is not specifically limited, It is preferable to use said fragrance | flavor raw material 0.000001 to 1% in a formulation composition. Moreover, as a fragrance | flavor for perfume which used the said fragrance | flavor raw material together, it is preferable to use 0.1 to 2.0% in a formulation composition.

  As an active ingredient, in addition to the cationic antibacterial agent (C), as other active ingredients, for example, cationic fungicides such as decalinium chloride, phenolic compounds such as triclosan and hinokitiol, dextranase, Enzymes such as mutanase, lysozyme, amylase, protease, lytic enzyme, superoxide, alkali metal monofluorophosphates such as sodium monofluorophosphate and potassium monofluorophosphate, fluorides such as sodium fluoride and stannous fluoride, Tranexamic acid, epsilon aminocaproic acid, aluminum chlorohydroxyl allantoin, dihydrocholestanol, glycyrrhizic acid, glycyrrhetinic acid, bisabolol, glycerophosphate, chlorophyll, sodium chloride, water-soluble inorganic The active ingredient of acid compounds may be formulated 1 or more. The compounding amount of the active ingredient can be an effective amount as long as the effects of the present invention are not hindered.

  EXAMPLES Hereinafter, although an experimental example, an Example, and a comparative example are shown and this invention is demonstrated concretely, this invention is not restrict | limited to the following Example. In the following examples, the blending amount is mass%.

[Experimental example]
Test compositions having the compositions shown in Table 1 were prepared by the following methods, and oral biofilm antibacterial effects, tongue coating removal effects, and mucosal irritation improving effects were evaluated by the following methods. The results are shown in Table 1.

Methods for preparing test compositions (comparative examples and examples):
Polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil, dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide, cationic antibacterial agent, and other components dissolved by heating at 60 ° C. were weighed and prepared by adding distilled water to a total amount of 100 g. . Thereafter, the dispersion / dissolution by stirring at 60 ° C. for 1 hour was immediately used in the experiment.

[Method for evaluating biofilm antibacterial effect]
Actinomyces naeslundii ATCC 51655 strain, Fusobacterium nucleatum ATCC 10953 strain, Porphyromonas gingivalis Porhyromonas gingivalis ATCC 33277 strain, Streptococcus sanguinis ATCC 10556 strain 40 μL of each bacterial solution autoclaved at 121 ° C. for 15 minutes, respectively 5 mg / L hemin (Sigma Aldrich L) Vitamin 1 mg Todd Hewit Broth including Yakuhin Kogyo) Was added to Becton and Dickinson Co.) broth (THBHM ^* 1) 4mL, overnight anaerobically cultured at 37 ° C. (80 vol% nitrogen, 10 vol% carbon dioxide, 10 vol% of hydrogen) was. After culture, 300 μL was collected from each bacterial solution (4 types), added to 30 mL of THBHM, and further cultured overnight. After re-culture, each bacterial solution was centrifuged (10,000 rpm, 10 min), and the supernatant was discarded.

After each suspension (bacteria) was autoclaved at 121 ° C. for 15 minutes, a basal medium mucin culture solution (BMM ^{* 2} ) was added and resuspended. Each was inoculated to 1 × 10 ⁷ cells / mL and cultured overnight at 37 ° C. under anaerobic conditions (95 vol% nitrogen, 5 vol% carbon dioxide). Thereafter, BMM was supplied at a rate of 100 mL / h, and the culture solution was discharged at the same rate. The culture solution discharged from the culture tank was continuously supplied to another culture tank in which the liquid volume was kept at 300 mL.
A hydroxyapatite disk (diameter 7 mm × height 3.5 mm) as an attachment carrier was attached to a turntable (rotated at about 80 rpm) in the culture tank, and a biofilm was formed on the surface.

  The culture by the above method was carried out for 14 days, and the following drug treatment was carried out for the latter 7 days. That is, once a day, the hydroxyapatite disk to which the biofilm was attached was taken out of the culture tank, transferred to a petri dish (diameter 35 mm × height 14 mm), and immersed in 5 g of the test composition (Example and Comparative Example) for 30 seconds. Then, after washing 3 times with 5 g of physiological saline, it was returned to the culture tank again. The same operation was performed seven times.

At the end of the culture, the biofilm was transferred to a test tube (diameter 13 mm × 100 mm) to which 4 mL of THBHM was added in order to evaluate the biofilm antibacterial effect of the test composition. Immediately after sonication (200 μA output for 10 seconds) and serial dilution (10-fold dilution in 6 steps), each bacterial solution was smeared on a blood agar plate medium ^{* 3} prepared by a conventional method. The plate medium was anaerobically cultured (80 vol% nitrogen, 10 vol% carbon dioxide, 10 vol% hydrogen) until colonies could be confirmed with the naked eye. After counting the number of colonies in each plate medium, the number of viable bacteria was calculated by a conventional method. The results were calculated according to the following evaluation criteria after calculating the effect of the test composition with Comparative Example 1 as a control from the following formula.

Evaluation criteria:
X: The effect of the test composition with Comparative Example 1 as a control is -4 or more and 0 or less Δ: The effect of the test composition with Comparative Example 1 as a control exceeds 0 and 2 or less ○: Comparative Example 1 is a control The effect of the test composition was more than 2 and 4 or less. A: The effect of the test composition with Comparative Example 1 as a control was more than 4 and 7 or less.

^{* 1} Composition of THBHM: Expressed by mass in 1 liter.
Todd Hewitt Broth (Becton and Dickinson):
30g / L
Hemin (Sigma Aldrich): 5mg / L
Vitamin K (manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries): 1mg / L
Distilled water: remaining
(Measured up so that the total amount was 1 L.)

^{* 2} BMM composition: Expressed by mass in 1 liter.
Proteose peptone (Becton and Dickinson):
2g / L
Tryptone (Becton and Dickinson): 1g / L
Tripty case peptone (Becton and Dickinson):
1g / L
Mucin (Sigma Aldrich): 2.5g / L
Hemin (Sigma Aldrich): 1mg / L
Vitamin K (manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.): 0.2mg / L
KCl (manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries): 0.5g / L
Cysteine (manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries): 0.1 g / L
Distilled water: remaining
(Measured up so that the total amount was 1 L.)

^{* 3} Composition of blood agar plate medium: Expressed by mass in 1 liter.
Todd Hewitt Broth (Becton and Dickinson):
30g / L
Agar (Becton and Dickinson): 15g / L
Hemin (Sigma Aldrich): 5mg / L
Vitamin K (manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries): 1mg / L
Distilled water: remaining
(Measured up so that the total amount was 1 L.)
Sheep defibrinated blood: 50 mL added
(1 L of the above composition was autoclaved at 121 ° C. for 15 minutes, then cooled to 45 ° C. and added.)

[Evaluation method for tongue coating removal power]
In order to evaluate tongue coating removal power, first, the subject's tongue coating area and the maximum thickness of tongue coating were measured with the following scores. Thereafter, in a state where tongue cleaning with a toothbrush or a tongue brush was prohibited, 15 g of the test composition (Comparative Examples and Examples) was impregnated for 30 seconds, and after discharging the test solution, the teeth were brushed for 3 minutes. The same operation was continued twice a day, and after 5 days, the tongue coating adhesion area and the maximum thickness of tongue coating were evaluated in the same manner as at the start of the test.

Score:
(1) Tongue moss adhesion area 0: The tongue moss adhesion area is 1/6 or less of the tongue.
1: The adhesion area of tongue coating exceeds 1/6 of the tongue and is 1/3 or less.
2: The adhesion area of tongue coating exceeds 1/3 of the tongue and is 2/3 or less.
3: The adhesion area of tongue coating exceeds 2/3 of the tongue.

(2) Maximum thickness of tongue coating 1: The tongue papilla is completely recognized at the maximum thickness portion of tongue coating.
2: Part of the tongue papilla is observed at the maximum thickness part of the tongue coating.
3: No lingual papillae are observed at the maximum thickness part of tongue coating.

  After obtaining the tongue coating removal power of the test composition of each subject according to the following formula, the average value of 10 persons was calculated. The results are shown in the following evaluation criteria using a score obtained by subtracting the tongue coating removing power of Comparative Example 1 from the tongue coating removing power of the test composition (difference in the effect of the test composition with respect to Comparative Example 1).

Formula:
Tongue removal power of the test composition of each subject =
(Lingus adhesion area before test x maximum thickness of tongue coating before test)-(Lingus adhesion area after test x maximum thickness of tongue coating after test)

Evaluation criteria:
×: Difference in effect of test composition relative to Comparative Example 1 is 0 point or less Δ: Difference in effect of test composition relative to Comparative Example 1 exceeds 0 point and is 1.5 points or less ○: Test composition relative to Comparative Example 1 The difference in effect exceeds 1.5 points and is 3.0 points or less. A: The difference in effect of the test composition with respect to Comparative Example 1 exceeds 3.0 points

[Evaluation of oral mucosal irritation]
Evaluation of oral mucosal irritation was performed by a human use test. In other words, 10 subjects were subjected to 30 g of test composition (comparative examples and examples) for 30 seconds, the test solution was discharged, and the irritation to the oral mucosa when brushing the teeth for 3 minutes was evaluated according to the following score. I let you. The result was calculated | required with the following evaluation criteria from the average value of 10 persons.

Score:
1 point: Oral mucosal irritation worsened as compared with Comparative Example 1.
2 points: Oral mucosal irritation equivalent to Comparative Example 1 was observed.
3 points: Slight irritation reduction effect was observed as compared with Comparative Example 1.
4 points: The stimulus reducing effect was recognized as compared with Comparative Example 1.
5 points: Significant stimulus reduction effect was observed compared to Comparative Example 1.

Evaluation criteria:
×: Score from 1 to 2 points △: Score from 2 to 3 points ○: Score from 3 to 4 points ◎: Score from 4 to 5 points

1) Nikko Chemicals Co., Ltd., parentheses indicate the average number of moles of ethylene oxide added.
2) manufactured by Nippon Oil & Fats Co., Ltd. 3) cetylpyridinium chloride manufactured by Tokyo Kasei Kogyo Co., Ltd. 4) chlorhexidine gluconate manufactured by Sigma-Aldrich Co. (as a control for component (C) of the present invention)
5) Benzalkonium chloride manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. 6) Benzethonium chloride manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. 7) manufactured by Kao Corporation

  From the results of Table 1, in the presence of (C) cetylpyridinium chloride, (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100 / (B) mass ratio of dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide Is less than 1.0 or exceeds 20 (Comparative Examples 1 to 4), or when chlorhexidine gluconate is blended in place of the cationic antibacterial agent (Comparative Example 5) (Comparative Example 5), (B) dihydroxyethyl When lauryl dimethylamine oxide is blended instead of lauryl amine oxide (Comparative Example 6), when polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 20 is used instead of the component (A) (comparison) Example 7) is inferior to any of hypoallergenicity, biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect, and cannot satisfy all It was. On the other hand, in the presence of at least one cationic antibacterial agent selected from (C) cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride, and benzalkonium chloride, (A) the average added mole number of ethylene oxide is 40 to 100 When polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil and (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide are blended in a mass ratio of (A) / (B) in the range of 1.0 to 20 (Examples 1 to 19), The synergistic effect of the components was expressed, and good results were obtained in all items of hypoallergenicity, biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect, and the effectiveness of the present invention was recognized.

  Although details of the mechanism in the present invention are unknown, (A) polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average addition mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100, (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide, and (C) cetyl chloride. Three components with at least one cationic antibacterial agent selected from pyridinium, benzethonium chloride, and benzalkonium chloride form a complex molecule, so that there is almost no strong irritation to the oral mucosa and Adsorbs not only on films, especially biofilms formed on tooth surfaces, but also on biofilms on the tongue with different bacterial flora, showing excellent antibacterial effect, low irritation and high biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating It is considered that the removal effect is exhibited.

[Example 20] Liquid dentifrice polyoxyethylene (100) hydrogenated castor oil
(Nippon Surfactant) 0.6%
Dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide (manufactured by NOF Corporation) 0.06
Silicic anhydride 18.0
Xanthan gum 0.2
Sodium polyacrylate 0.1
70% sorbite solution 35.0
Glycerin 17.0
Propylene glycol 5.0
Cetylpyridinium chloride (Tokyo Chemical Industry Co., Ltd.) 0.05
Fragrance A 0.8
Purified water remaining
Total 100.0%
(Mass ratio of polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil / dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100 = 10)

[Example 21] Toothpaste dicalcium phosphate 47.0%
Silicic anhydride 2.5
70% sorbite solution 24.0
Propylene glycol 3.0
Sodium carboxymethylcellulose 1.0
Sodium alginate 0.2
Saccharin sodium 1.0
Fragrance A 1.0
Polyoxyethylene (80) hydrogenated castor oil
(Nippon Surfactant) 0.6
Dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide (manufactured by NOF Corporation) 0.2
Cetylpyridinium chloride (Tokyo Chemical Industry Co., Ltd.) 0.01
Purified water remaining
Total 100.0%
(Mass ratio of polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil / dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100 = 3.0)

[Example 22] toothpaste calcium carbonate 40.0%
Propylene glycol 3.0
Glycerin 20.0
Sodium carboxymethylcellulose 1.5
Titanium oxide 0.5
Saccharin sodium 0.1
Ethyl paraoxybenzoate 0.1
Fragrance A 1.0
Polyoxyethylene (100) hydrogenated castor oil
(Nippon Surfactant) 0.6
Dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide (manufactured by NOF Corporation) 0.12
Cetylpyridinium chloride (manufactured by Tokyo Chemical Industry Co., Ltd.) 0.03
Purified water remaining
Total 100.0%
(Mass ratio of polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil / dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100 = 5.0)

[Example 23] Mouthwash ethanol 10.0%
Glycerin 20.0
Saccharin sodium 0.3
Fragrance B 0.5
Polyoxyethylene (100) hydrogenated castor oil
(Nippon Surfactant) 0.4
Dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide (manufactured by NOF Corporation) 0.09
Cetylpyridinium chloride (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.) 0.01
Benzalkonium chloride (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.) 0.01
Benzethonium chloride (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.) 0.01
Purified water remaining
Total 100.0%
(Mass ratio of polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil / dihydroxyethyl lauryl amine oxide having an average added mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100 = 4.4)

  In addition, the fragrance | flavors A and B are as follows.

  As mentioned above, as a result of performing evaluation similar to an experimental example with respect to Examples 20-23, all obtained favorable results in terms of hypoallergenicity, biofilm antibacterial effect and tongue coating removal effect.

Claims (1)

  (A) Polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil having an average addition mole number of ethylene oxide of 40 to 100, (B) dihydroxyethyl laurylamine oxide, (C) cetylpyridinium chloride, benzethonium chloride, and benzalkonium chloride A composition for oral cavity containing a cationic antibacterial agent and having a mass ratio of (A) / (B) of 1.0 to 20.