Lifting With Neuromodulators.

BACKGROUND: The use of botulinum toxins for facial rejuvenation and improvement of dynamic wrinkles has become a mainstay in the aesthetic treatment armamentarium. However, using these same neuromodulators (NMs) for lifting the structures of the face, is a newer addition to antiaging protocols. The muscles of facial animation all interplay with each other. Lifting can be accomplished by treating those muscles that are responsible for depression, leaving the elevators unopposed and resulting in a rejuvenated, lifted outcome. Brow lifting, cheek lifting, and even contouring of the lower face and jawline are all possibilities using NMs. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature and current practices in techniques for lifting the different anatomic facial zones. METHODS: The authors present and discuss the published data and personal experiences of using NM for lifting and retraining of the facial musculature. This article will discuss the effects and approaches to lifting with botulinum toxin injections, including the potential success and side effects associated with these off-label injections. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: The use of botulinum toxins has expanded beyond its traditional use as a reducer of dynamic wrinkles. A significant amount of published data now exists for the off-label use of botulinum toxins for lifting and shaping the face. These can be considered advanced techniques as each region has its own anatomic intricacies and side effects can occur. More placebo-controlled objective data would also help elucidate exact dosing strategies for each region.

LetibotulinumtoxinA Attenuates the Psychological Burden of Glabellar Lines and Is Associated With High Subject Satisfaction in Phase 3 Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Hyperfunctional glabellar frown lines can transmit facial miscues that adversely affect emotional communication, increase perceptions of age, and diminish self-esteem. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of letibotulinumtoxinA in mitigating the negative psychological impact associated with moderate to severe glabellar lines and to assess subject satisfaction with treatment outcome in the BLESS phase 3 clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Baseline and posttreatment assessments were made using validated subject-administered instruments: Modified Skindex-16 Glabellar Line Quality of Life (GL-QoL) Scale, Facial Assessment and Cosmetic Evaluation Questionnaire (FACE-Q) Appraisal of Lines Between Eyebrows Scale, FACE-Q Age Appraisal Visual Analog Scale, and FACE-Q Satisfaction with Outcome Scale. An integrated analysis using pooled BLESS data was conducted on these secondary end points. RESULTS: Among enrolled and treated subjects ( N = 1,272), 85.5% had moderate to severe psychological impact at baseline. LetibotulinumtoxinA subjects experienced significant improvements compared with placebo on all measures. Mean improvement to Week 4 for the Modified Skindex-16 GL-QoL Scale overall score was -33.84 for letibotulinumtoxinA subjects compared with -1.37 for placebo subjects ( p < .001). Attenuation of psychological burden was highly correlated with improvement in glabellar line severity ( p < .0001). CONCLUSION: LetibotulinumtoxinA significantly improved the psychosocial burden associated with glabellar lines across all trials. Treated subjects experienced improved quality of life, younger perceived age, and satisfaction with treatment outcome.

A Review of Current Data on Duration of Effect in Glabellar Lines After Treatment With AbobotulinumtoxinA 50 U.

BACKGROUND: AbobotulinumtoxinA has become well established as a treatment option for moderate to severe glabellar lines since its first aesthetic approval in 2009. OBJECTIVE: Pivotal trials leading to regulatory approval showed that abobotulinumtoxinA treatment was associated with high responder rates when defined as achievement of none or mild glabellar lines (0 or 1 on the glabellar line severity scale) and a duration of action of up to 5 months. More recently, the goals for treatment of glabellar lines have shifted toward not only achieving a decrease in glabellar line severity but also ensuring that patients are satisfied with their experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients seek an improvement in the appearance of their glabellar lines while maintaining a "natural look," fast onset of effect, and long duration of response. RESULTS: Trial designs have evolved to meet these new targets, including expanding the definition of responders to those having at least 1-grade improvement in the glabellar line severity scale score from baseline coupled with the use of subject satisfaction and psychological well-being questionnaires. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate that abobotulinumtoxinA remains a well-tolerated and consistently effective treatment option associated with a rapid onset of effect, duration of efficacy lasting up to 6 months, and high, long-lasting levels of patient satisfaction.

Effectiveness and Safety of Resilient Hyaluronic Acid (RHA) Dermal Fillers for the Correction of Moderate-to-Severe Nasolabial Folds in People of Color: Post Hoc Subgroup Analyses of US Pivotal Clinical Data.

BACKGROUND: People of color (POC) are often underrepresented in clinical studies evaluating the safety and effectiveness of aesthetic products, including hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers, for which there is to date limited clinical data in POC. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of a new line of dynamic resilient HA fillers (RHA; Revance, Nashville, TN) for treating moderate-to-severe nasolabial folds (NLFs) in POC vs non-POC. METHODS: Post hoc subgroup analyses compared the efficacy and safety of POC vs non-POC subjects treated with RHA2, RHA3, or RHA4 for correction of moderate-to-severe NLFs in the pooled per-protocol population (N = 217) in 2 clinical trials. Evaluated population cohorts were classified by Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) (high FST [IV-VI] vs low FST [I-III]) and by subject-reported race (non-White vs White) relative to baseline at 6, 9, 12, and 15 months. RESULTS: POC consistently showed greater improvement in wrinkle severity and higher responder rates compared with non-POC, which reached statistical significance at several measured time points. Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale scores and subject satisfaction ratings were similar for POC and non-POC and remained high throughout the course of the study. Treatment-related adverse event rates were generally lower for high FSTs vs low FSTs, with no reported cases of keloidal scarring. CONCLUSION: The RHA line of dynamic fillers is well tolerated and effective for the correction of moderate-to-severe NLFs in POC and can be confidently used in this important and growing patient population.See the abstract translated into Hindi, Portuguese, Korean, German, Italian, Arabic, Chinese, and Taiwanese online here: https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjad251.

Safety and Duration of Effect of 40-Unit PrabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines in Adult Patients: A Phase II, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Active-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Extending the duration of effect of botulinum toxins-by administering doses beyond those of the approved labels-has been an area of increasing interest in the field of aesthetics. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and duration of effect of 40-unit (U) prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs (twice the approved dose and concentration) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe glabellar lines. METHODS: A total of 154 adult patients were randomized 1:1:1 to a single treatment of either 40 U prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs (PRA 40, 5 injections of 8 U/0.05 mL), or 20 U of either prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs (PRA 20) or onabotulinumtoxinA (ONA 20). Both 20-U controls were administered as 5 injections of 4 U/0.1 mL. Efficacy and safety were assessed on days 2, 7 (by telephone), 30, and every 30 days thereafter up to 365 days or until the patient had returned to baseline. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the duration of effect (estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis), defined as the number of days from treatment day (baseline) to the day that glabellar line severity at maximum frown by investigator assessment returned to the baseline value. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 47 years (20-72 years); 69.5% had severe glabellar lines at baseline. Of the 36 adverse events, 32 (88.9%) were mild and 4 (11.1%) were moderate in severity; none were serious. The median durations of effect were estimated to be 183, 149, and 148 days for PRA 40-, PRA 20-, and ONA 20-treated patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 pilot study, 40 U prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs was observed to be safe and had a duration of 6 months.

A Randomized, Multicenter, Evaluator-blind Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of VYC-12L Treatment for Skin Quality Improvements.

BACKGROUND: Skin quality may be assessed by degrees of skin smoothness, fine lines, and hydration. VYC-12L is a recently developed hyaluronic acid filler to improve skin quality. OBJECTIVE: This was a randomized, evaluator-blind study assessing safety and effectiveness of intradermal VYC-12L treatment for improving cheek skin smoothness, fine lines, and hydration. METHODS: Participants (≥22 years) with moderate-to-severe investigator-assessed Allergan Cheek Smoothness Scale (ACSS) scores were randomized in 2:1 ratio to receive VYC-12L or control (no treatment with optional treatment). Effectiveness was assessed 1 month after last injection (initial or touch-up) by a responder rate (≥1-grade improvement from baseline on both cheeks) using investigator-rated ACSS and Allergan Fine Lines Scale (AFLS), and tissue dielectric constant probe-measured skin hydration. Safety was evaluated throughout. RESULTS: Participants (VYC-12L, n = 131; control, n = 71) were 86.1% female with a median age of 58.0 years. At month 1, ACSS and AFLS responder rates were statistically significantly higher in the VYC-12L group (57.9%, 58.3%, respectively) than in the untreated controls (4.5%, 5.4%, respectively; p < .001). VYC-12L ACSS and AFLS responder rates remained consistent throughout the 6-month follow-up. Six participants reported treatment-related adverse events; none led to study discontinuation. CONCLUSION: VYC-12L is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for lasting improvement of cheek skin smoothness, fine lines, and hydration.

Patient Comfort, Safety, and Effectiveness of Resilient Hyaluronic Acid Fillers Formulated With Different Local Anesthetics.

BACKGROUND: Maximizing patient comfort during hyaluronic acid gel injection is a common concern that is usually addressed by selecting fillers with lidocaine. OBJECTIVE: Two randomized, double-blinded, split-face trials aimed to demonstrate noninferiority of specific hyaluronic acid fillers incorporating mepivacaine (RHA-M) versus their lidocaine controls, at providing pain relief. METHODS: Thirty subjects per trial received injections of RHA R -M versus RHA R , and RHA4-M versus RHA4, respectively, in the perioral rhytids (PR) and nasolabial folds (NLF). Pain was assessed on a visual analog scale; aesthetic effectiveness was evaluated with validated scales, and safety was monitored based on common treatment responses (CTRs) and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: RHA-M fillers proved as effective as their lidocaine counterparts at reducing pain (noninferior, p < .0002 and p < .0001). Bilateral wrinkle improvement was measured both in the PR (-1.5 ± 0.6 points on each side) and in the NLF (-1.8 ± 0.6 and -1.9 ± 0.5 points) trials at one month, with virtually identical responder rates (≥96.7%). Common treatment responses and AEs were similar between treated sides, and none was clinically significant. CONCLUSION: Resilient hyaluronic acid fillers with either mepivacaine or lidocaine are equally effective at reducing pain during treatment and equally performant and safe for correction of dynamic facial wrinkles and folds.

Efficacy and Safety of a New Resilient Hyaluronic Acid Filler in the Correction of Moderate-to-Severe Dynamic Perioral Rhytides: A 52-Week Prospective, Multicenter, Controlled, Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study.

BACKGROUND: The perioral region is highly mobile and subject to multifactorial changes during aging. Resilient Hyaluronic Acid Redensity (RHAR), an RHA filler, was developed with the aim of optimizing outcomes in dynamic facial areas. OBJECTIVE: This randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical study aimed to demonstrate superiority of RHAR over no-treatment control for correction of moderate-to-severe dynamic perioral rhytides. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Blinded live evaluator assessments of efficacy included improvement in perioral rhytides severity using a proprietary scale (Perioral Rhytids Severity Rating Scale [PR-SRS]) and the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. Subjects self-assessed their results with FACE-Q, a validated patient-reported outcome measure, and satisfaction scales. Safety was monitored throughout the study based on common treatment responses (CTRs) and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: The primary efficacy end point was achieved, with the treatment group showing statistically significant superiority over the control group at Week 8 (80.7% vs 7.8% responder rate by PR-SRS, p < .0001). Most patients (66%) were still responders at Week 52 (study completion). Most AEs were CTRs after perioral injection of a dermal filler, and none was a clinically significant treatment-related AE. CONCLUSION: Resilient Hyaluronic Acid Redensity is effective and safe for the correction of dynamic perioral rhytides in all Fitzpatrick phototypes, with marked durability.

Injection Guidelines for Treating Midface Volume Deficiency With Hyaluronic Acid Fillers: The ATP Approach (Anatomy, Techniques, Products).

Midface rejuvenation is among the most valuable indications of hyaluronic acid dermal fillers, because malar projection and full upper cheeks significantly contribute to a youthful appearance. Hyaluronic acid fillers have evolved over the past 2 decades to meet specific clinical needs such as strong projection capacity and adaptability to facial dynamism. As a result, they now represent the treatment of choice for midface rejuvenation throughout age ranges by offering the potential for noninvasive treatment, immediate results, and minimal downtime. Because the 5-layered structure of the midface plays a central role in the human face, injecting the midface area may also indirectly improve other aesthetic concerns such as infraorbital hollowing and nasolabial folds. Nonetheless, midface rejuvenation requires a tailored treatment approach and a thorough knowledge of anatomy to minimize procedural risks and achieve natural-looking results. This article provides an extensive anatomical description of the midface and of the usual course and depth of vascular structures circulating nearby to delineate a treatment area and minimize procedural risks. Furthermore, considering the differential mobility and mechanical constraints of each layer of the midface, a multilayer treatment algorithm is proposed for adapting the treatment strategy to patient specificities (including age, gender, skin type, and morphology). Emphasis is also placed on desirable filler properties to create deep structural support on the one hand and accompany facial movement on the other hand.

Efficacy and Safety of Letibotulinumtoxin A in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Study.

BACKGROUND: Letibotulinumtoxin A (Hugel, Inc., Chuncheon, Republic of Korea and CROMA Pharma, Leobendorf, Austria) is a newly manufactured neurotoxin derived from Clostridium botulinum strain CBFC26. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of letibotulinumtoxin A in reducing glabellar line severity (GLS) and to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy following repeated injections. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled Phase III clinical trial, 355 subjects with moderate to severe glabella frown lines received injections of 20 U of letibotulinumtoxin A or placebo. GLS, onset and duration of effect, time to retreatment, and adverse events were evaluated. Response to treatment was defined as a GLS score of 0 or 1 (assessed by the subject and the investigator) and an improvement at Week 4 of ≥2 points in GLS score relative to baseline. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, 78.6% of the active treatment subjects were responders based on the investigator's assessment and 68.8% based on the subject's assessment, resulting in a composite responder rate of 64.7% for the active treatment group, whereas the corresponding rate was 0.0% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). Subjects noted a substantial improvement in GL severity as early as Day 2, with the median time to onset of effect being 3 days. The mean [standard deviation] time until first retreatment for the letibotulinumtoxin A group was 127.26 [65.6] days. Letibotulinumtoxin A was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Letibotulinumtoxin A demonstrates high efficacy and a convincing safety profile in the treatment of glabellar lines.

Safe and Effective Chin Augmentation With the Hyaluronic Acid Injectable Filler, VYC-20L.

BACKGROUND: VYC-20L is a hyaluronic acid soft tissue filler with lidocaine designed to restore facial volume. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the safety and effectiveness of VYC-20L in patients with chin retrusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults with chin retrusion were randomized (3:1) to receive VYC-20L in the chin at study onset (treatment group) or 6 months later (control group). The primary effectiveness end point was ≥1-point improvement on the Allergan Chin Retrusion Scale (ACRS) from baseline at Month 6. Safety assessments included injection site responses (ISRs) and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: VYC-20L was administered to 192 participants (treatment group, n = 144; control group, n = 48). At Month 6, significantly more participants had an ACRS response in the treatment versus control group (56.3% vs 27.5%; p = .0019). Effectiveness was also demonstrated by the proportion of participants with improved/much improved Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale scores and responses on the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Chin questionnaire and FACE-Q Psychological Wellbeing module. Treatment benefit remained evident at Month 12. Most common ISRs were tenderness (81.1%) and firmness (75.1%). One participant (0.5%) discontinued the study due to 2 treatment-related serious AEs of facial cellulitis and injection site inflammation, both resolved without sequelae. CONCLUSION: VYC-20L significantly improved an ACRS response and was generally safe and well tolerated.

A Randomized, Controlled, Evaluator-Blinded, Multi-Center Study of Hyaluronic Acid Filler Effectiveness and Safety in Lip Fullness Augmentation.

BACKGROUND: HARK was recently approved in the US for lip augmentation and correction of upper perioral rhytids. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate noninferiority of HARK versus a control (HAJV) in lip fullness augmentation at Week 8 after last injection (blinded evaluation). Secondary objectives were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of HARK in lip fullness augmentation and correction of upper perioral rhytids. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment with HARK or control (randomized 2:1) was administered on Day 1 in this 48-week, evaluator-blinded study with optional touch-up at Week 4. Primary endpoint was change from baseline to Week 8 in lip fullness. Secondary endpoints included lip fullness, wrinkle severity, aesthetic improvement, subject satisfaction, adverse events, and local tolerability (subject diary entries). RESULTS: The primary objective was met; HARK was noninferior to control in lip fullness augmentation at Week 8. Lip fullness and wrinkle severity improvement persisted at Week 48, and was accompanied by high aesthetic improvement and subject satisfaction scores. The mean volume of HARK injected was approximately 20% lower than control. Treatment-related adverse events and local tolerability symptoms were predominantly mild and transient. CONCLUSION: HARK was noninferior to control in lip fullness augmentation at Week 8, well-tolerated, and effective throughout this 48-week study.

Collagenase Clostridium Histolyticum-aaes for the Treatment of Cellulite in Women: Results From Two Phase 3 Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Fibrous septae play a role in contour alterations associated with cellulite. OBJECTIVE: To assess collagenase clostridium histolyticum-aaes (CCH) for the treatment of cellulite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two identically designed phase 3, double-blind, randomized studies (RELEASE-1 and RELEASE-2) were conducted. Adult women with moderate/severe cellulite (rating 3-4 on the Patient Reported Photonumeric Cellulite Severity Scale [PR-PCSS] and Clinician Reported PCSS [CR-PCSS]) on the buttocks received up to 3 treatment sessions of subcutaneous CCH 0.84 mg or placebo per treatment area. Composite response (≥2-level or ≥1-level improvement from baseline in both PR-PCSS and CR-PCSS) was determined at Day 71. RESULTS: Eight hundred forty-three women received ≥1 injection (CCH vs placebo: RELEASE-1, n = 210 vs n = 213; RELEASE-2, n = 214 vs n = 206). Greater percentages of CCH-treated women were ≥2-level composite responders versus placebo in RELEASE-1 (7.6% vs 1.9%; p = .006) and RELEASE-2 (5.6% vs 0.5%; p = .002) and ≥1-level composite responders in RELEASE-1 (37.1% vs 17.8%; p < .001) and RELEASE-2 (41.6% vs 11.2%; p < .001). Most adverse events (AEs) in the CCH group were injection site related; few CCH-treated women discontinued because of an AE (≤4.3%). CONCLUSION: Collagenase clostridium histolyticum-aaes significantly improved cellulite appearance and was generally well tolerated.

AbobotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Glabellar Lines: A Randomized, Dose-Escalating, Double-Blind Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of AbobotulinumtoxinA (ABO) dose escalation in the correction of moderate-to-severe glabellar lines. DESIGN: Phase 2, 36-week, multicenter, randomized, dose-ranging, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. METHODS: Adults with moderate-to-severe glabellar lines received a single ABO treatment, dosed at 50, 75, 100, or 125 U, or placebo. Primary endpoint was week 4 composite ≥2-grade responder rate among those achieving a severity score of 0 (none) or 1 (mild) at maximum frown, evaluated using concurrent investigator and subject assessments. Secondary endpoints included ≥1-grade severity improvement, duration of effect, and reporting of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: Overall, 399 subjects were included (88.2% were female). Week 4 composite ≥2-grade ABO responder rate was 80.0% (50 U), 88.8% (75 U), 90.0% (100 U) and 95.1% (125 U), versus 2.6% with placebo (P<0.001). Responder rate (≥1-grade) ranged between 53% (50 U) and 69% (125 U) at week 24 and between 18% (50 U) and 31% (125 U) at week 36. Median time (weeks) to return to baseline severity/worse, among those scoring 0 (none) or 1 (mild), was 32.3 (50 U), 34.3 (75 U), 36.0 (100 U) and 36.6 (125 U), versus 23.7 (placebo). ABO-related TEAEs were reported in 4% of subjects (80% were mild). No seroconversion to ABO neutralizing antibodies was seen. CONCLUSION: A single ABO treatment provided rapid and effective improvements in glabellar line severity at all doses. Higher doses tended to demonstrate elevated response rates and longer duration of effect. All ABO doses were well-tolerated with low TEAE incidence. J Drugs Dermatol. 2021;20(9):980-987. doi:10.36849/JDD.6263.

The First of Two One-Year, Multicenter, Open-Label, Repeat-Dose, Phase II Safety Studies of PrabotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines in Adult Patients.

BACKGROUND: PrabotulinumtoxinA is a 900-kDa botulinum toxin type A produced by Clostridium botulinum. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to investigate the safety of prabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of glabellar lines. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, repeat-dose, 1-year phase II safety study. Adults with moderate to severe glabellar lines at maximum frown, as assessed by the investigator on the validated 4-point photonumeric Glabellar Line Scale (0 = no lines, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe), were enrolled. On day 0, patients received an initial treatment of 20 U prabotulinumtoxinA (4 U/0.1 mL freeze-dried formulation injected into 5 target glabellar sites). On and after day 90, patients received a repeat treatment (RT) if their Glabellar Line Scale score was ≥2 at maximum frown by investigator assessment. Safety was evaluated throughout the study. RESULTS: The 352 study patients received a median total dose of 60 U, that is, 3 treatments per year. Fifty-one patients (14.5%) experienced adverse events (AEs) assessed as possibly study drug related; 11.1% experienced study drug-related AEs after the initial treatment. With each RT, progressively lower percentages of patients experienced study drug-related AEs. Six patients (1.7%) experienced study drug-related AEs of special interest: 3 eyelid ptosis (0.9%), 2 speech disorder (0.6%), and 1 blepharospasm (0.3%). Seven patients (2.0%) experienced serious AEs; none were study drug related. Of the 2393 samples tested, 2 patients (0.6%) tested positive for antibotulinum toxin antibodies at a single postbaseline visit. CONCLUSIONS: The safety of RTs of 20 U of prabotulinumtoxinA for moderate to severe glabellar lines was first established in this early phase II study based on a broad range of outcomes.

The Second of Two One-Year, Multicenter, Open-Label, Repeat-Dose, Phase II Safety Studies of PrabotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines in Adult Patients.

BACKGROUND: PrabotulinumtoxinA is a 900-kDa botulinum toxin type A produced by Clostridium botulinum. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to investigate the safety of prabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of glabellar lines. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, repeat-dose, 1-year phase II safety study. Adults with moderate to severe glabellar lines at maximum frown, as independently assessed by both investigator and patient on the validated 4-point photonumeric Glabellar Line Scale (0 = no lines, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe), were enrolled. On day 0, patients received an initial treatment (IT) of 20 U prabotulinumtoxinA (4 U/0.1 mL final vacuum-dried formulation injected into 5 glabellar sites). On and after day 90, patients received a repeat treatment (RT) if their Glabellar Line Scale score was ≥2 at maximum frown by investigator assessment. Safety outcomes were evaluated throughout the study. RESULTS: The 570 study patients received a median total dose of 60 U, that is, 3 treatments. Sixty-one patients (10.7%) experienced adverse events (AEs) assessed as possibly study drug related; 6.5% experienced study drug-related AEs after the IT. With each RT, progressively lower percentages of patients experienced study drug-related AEs. Eight patients (1.4%) experienced study drug-related AEs of special interest: 5 experienced eyelid ptosis (0.9%), 3 eyebrow ptosis (0.5%), 1 blepharospasm (0.2%), and 1 blurred vision (0.2%). Seven patients (1.2%) experienced serious AEs, but none were study drug related. A total of 4060 serum samples were tested for antibotulinum toxin antibodies; no seroconversion was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The safety of RTs of 20 U of prabotulinumtoxinA for moderate to severe glabellar lines was confirmed in this second phase II study based on a broad range of outcomes.

DaxibotulinumtoxinA for Injection has a prolonged duration of response in the treatment of glabellar lines: Pooled data from two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies (SAKURA 1 and SAKURA 2).

BACKGROUND: DaxibotulinumtoxinA for Injection (DAXI) is a novel botulinum toxin type A in clinical development. Phase 2 data have shown it offers a more prolonged duration of response than onabotulinumtoxinA. OBJECTIVE: To further evaluate the efficacy, duration of response, and safety of 40 U DAXI compared with placebo in the treatment of glabellar lines. METHODS: Two identical, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies were performed (NCT03014622 and NCT03014635 on www.clinicaltrials.gov). Participants with moderate or severe glabellar lines were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive 40 U DAXI or placebo into the corrugator/procerus muscles. Glabellar line severity was assessed by investigators and participants for up to 36 weeks (≥24 weeks). RESULTS: Among 609 participants enrolled (405 DAXI, 204 placebo), 92% completed. DAXI was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing glabellar line severity and maintained none or mild glabellar line severity for a median of 24.0 weeks. It was also generally well tolerated-treatment-related adverse effects were most commonly headache (6.4% vs 2.0%) and injection site pain (3.7% vs 3.9%). LIMITATIONS: The study population was predominantly female and white and received only a single treatment. CONCLUSIONS: DAXI offers a prolonged duration of response for glabellar line reduction and is well tolerated.

Efficacy and Safety of Two Resilient Hyaluronic Acid Fillers in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Nasolabial Folds: A 64-Week, Prospective, Multicenter, Controlled, Randomized, Double-Blinded, and Within-Subject Study.

BACKGROUND: A range of monophasic dermal fillers made of high-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid (HA) chains with reduced cross-linking was developed for aesthetic procedures. OBJECTIVE: The efficacy, durability, and safety of 2 of these resilient HA (RHA) fillers, and their noninferiority to an effective HA comparator available in the United States, were tested in the treatment of dynamic facial wrinkles. METHODS: A 15-month, prospective, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized, double-blinded, split-face clinical trial was carried out on 174 subjects presenting moderate-to-severe bilateral nasolabial folds (NLFs). Assessed parameters included improvement on a proprietary Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale (WSRS) and Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale, according to Blind Live Evaluators, subjects, and treating investigators. Self-perception was evaluated with FACE-Q and satisfaction scales. RESULTS: The per-protocol populations included 67 and 62 subjects of all Fitzpatrick skin-phototypes, in the 2 comparison groups. Significant improvement of mean WSRS scores and associated responder rates established the noninferiority of RHA fillers to their comparator, over 15 months. Aesthetic improvement and subject satisfaction were durably high, with no meaningful differences between the fillers. Treatments were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The 2 RHA fillers are at least equivalent to a well-established comparator for the correction of NLF in subjects of diverse skin-phototypes.

Effectiveness of a Nutraceutical During Non-Ablative 1927 nm Fractional Laser on Patients With Facial Hyperpigmentation and Photoaging.

Background: Fractional lasers have been proven to treat hyperpigmentation and photoaging. Little research has been done on the effects of supplements on healing post-laser resurfacing. A nutraceutical could offer the benefit of faster healing of the skin and fewer side effects.

Objective: Evaluate the effectiveness of a nutraceutical associated with fractional 1927 nm laser in healing time and effectiveness on hyperpigmentation and photoaging.

Methods & Materials: A prospective, randomized, evaluator-blinded, pilot study included Fitzpatrick skin types I-III patients with hyperpigmentation and photoaging randomly assigned to two groups. Group 1 was laser treatment and Group 2 was laser treatment and nutraceutical. Results were compared with objective biometric TEWL (transepidermal water loss), mexameter, corneometer, and cutometer parameters. A blinded physician-evaluator and the subjects completed questionnaires to evaluate skin improvements.

Results: Twenty women were included. Eight in Group 1 and 10 in Group 2 completed the study. Group 2 presented a faster recovery of the skin barrier function post procedure. Three months after the procedure, Group 2 presented with significantly improved skin glossiness, hydration, and melanin rebound levels. Group 2 presented more overall aesthetic improvement determined by the patient and the blinded physician-evaluator.

Conclusion: The nutraceutical improved the results of the laser treatment.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(5):501-506.