What is Centella asiatica? The plant behind cica skincare, explained

What is Centella asiatica, and where does it come from?

Centella asiatica is a creeping perennial herb in the Apiaceae family, the same family as carrots and parsley. It is the plant behind nearly every “cica” product.

Its older botanical name is Hydrocotyle asiatica, and other synonyms include Centella coriacea. English names include gotu kola, Asian pennywort, Indian pennywort and tiger grass. It grows in tropical and subtropical wetlands; the sources we reviewed list South and Southeast Asia, Australia, parts of Africa and Madagascar.

People have used it for a long time. A review of the plant as a crop lists Ayurvedic, Chinese, Kampo and African traditional medicine, and notes the leaves are eaten in dishes like Sri Lankan gotu kola sambola and Malay ulam.

What does “cica” mean on a skincare label?

“Cica” is brand shorthand for Centella asiatica. It is a marketing word, not a botanical name and not something we would expect to see as a formal ingredient name.

A 2025 preprint (not peer-reviewed) says the plant is “also known as Cica” and that US and Japanese retailers stock many cica products. We could not find an authoritative source on where the word comes from. It is often linked to scar-related words, but we haven't verified that, so we won't repeat it as fact.

“Tiger grass” is a real English name for the plant. We found no source tying it to the tiger imagery on K-beauty packaging.

Is gotu kola the same thing? Names in Hindi and other languages

Yes. Gotu kola is the Western herbal and supplement name for the same species, Centella asiatica.

In Ayurveda, the sources we reviewed give the Sanskrit name Mandookaparni (also spelled Mandukaparni) and sometimes Brahmi, and Unani medicine also uses Brahmi. A cosmetology review gives Hydrocotyle asiatique in French and Asiatischer Wassernabel in German.

None of our sources gives a specific Hindi name, so we won't assert one. Common names can overlap across herbal traditions. We haven't verified how exclusively “Brahmi” points to Centella, so go by the Latin name, Centella asiatica, when you are matching a product to the plant.

Leaf extract vs. centella complex vs. madecassoside: what is the difference?

They sit on a spectrum from whole-plant extract to purified molecule. Only the stated composition tells you where a product falls.

The plant's main actives are four triterpenoids: asiaticoside, madecassoside, asiatic acid and madecassic acid. A systematic review lists them, along with alternate names for two of them (brahminoside for madecassoside, brahmic acid for madecassic acid). The first two are glycosides (sugar attached); the last two are the sugar-free versions.

The variation is large. In the same crop review, madecassoside ranged from 0.15% to 5.27% across plant accessions, and asiaticoside from 0.04% to 2.41%. So “centella extract” is not a fixed dose of anything.

What is Centella asiatica PDRN, and is it the same as centella?

No. PDRN is not a Centella compound. It is a separate ingredient that some products pair with Centella.

PDRN stands for polydeoxyribonucleotide: a mixture of DNA fragments, 50 to 1,500 kDa in size. The classic version comes from purified sperm DNA of salmon trout or chum salmon and is described as acting on adenosine A2A receptors. The clinical literature we saw is mainly about injectable or medical use, not creams.

Plant and microbial versions exist, including PDRN from peony. The peony data are preclinical, and the only human test was a 10-person skin-barrier model. A 2026 review found no strong study showing plant-derived and salmon-derived PDRN share the same biological profile, and says they can differ in fragment size, contaminants and batch consistency.

We found no peer-reviewed Centella-derived PDRN, though our search was limited. The likeliest explanation for a “Centella PDRN” product is two ingredients in one bottle. We found no data on how much PDRN topical products contain, and we did not verify whether it penetrates intact skin.

What is centella cream, and how is it different from a serum or toner?

The difference is the formula around the Centella, not the Centella. We found no head-to-head comparison of Centella creams, serums and toners.

As general formulation knowledge (not from these studies), creams tend to be richer and more emollient, while toners and serums are lighter and more water-based.

What we do have: one study tested 2.5% and 5% extract in both an emulsion and a hydrogel. Both were non-irritating and non-sensitizing, and the extract improved hydration and barrier function and reduced experimentally induced microinflammation over four weeks.

Another tested a cream with Centella leaf extract, ceramide NP and panthenol in 88 Chinese women with sensitive skin. Sensitivity scores fell 66% at week 2 and 76% at week 4. It was uncontrolled, so it can't separate Centella from the ceramide and panthenol.

Is skincare centella the same as the supplement or the garden herb?

Same species, different products. Dose and route are what change, and trial results don't transfer between them.

• Skincare: a defined extract or isolated triterpenoids at stated concentrations. Trials have used 0.05% in a gel, 1% in a cream and 2.5–5% in emulsions.
• Supplement: dried leaf or extract taken by mouth. NIH's LiverTox calls it generally regarded as safe but links it to rare, clinically apparent acute liver injury with jaundice, based on only a few cases.
• Garden herb: whole leaf with an unknown, variable dose, since triterpenoid content swings widely between plants.

We found no study testing whether home-grown or food-use Centella affects skin, so a homemade infusion can't be assumed to match a formulated product. Supply is also a factor: one review says wild stocks are depleted by overexploitation, which is part of why commercial supply leans on cultivation and biotech methods.

What the evidence actually supports

Modest, and strongest for post-procedure redness and wound appearance. “Cica” does not mean a proven acne, scar or anti-aging treatment.

A systematic review of wound healing found only four clinical trials that met its criteria, with small numbers and varied preparations. The best-controlled example is a split-face, double-blind trial of 0.05% ECa 233 gel after laser resurfacing. The treated side had less erythema, but the difference was small (−0.03 erythema-index units, 95% CI −0.06 to −0.0006), and dermatologists scored wound appearance better on days 2 to 7.

For wrinkles, a network meta-analysis pooled five double-blind trials with 172 Asian women. Its authors say lack of standardization prevents general application and that long-term safety is unestablished.

Claims about collagen and inflammation pathways come mainly from lab and animal work, and a skin-disease review concludes long-term, rigorously controlled trials are still needed. On safety, allergic contact dermatitis is documented; a case report calls Centella a “weak sensitizer” and suggests patch testing at 1% in petrolatum. More in our Centella asiatica hub.