Efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA for treating crow's feet lines alone or in combination with glabellar lines: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This was the second study in a Phase 3 program treating crow's feet lines (CFL) with onabotulinumtoxinA. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA treatment of CFL alone or with glabellar lines (GL). METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, repeat treatment, 7-month study randomized subjects with moderate-to-severe CFL and GL (maximum contraction) to onabotulinumtoxinA 44 U (CFL: 24 U, GL: 20 U; n = 305), onabotulinumtoxinA 24 U (CFL: 24 U, GL: placebo; n = 306), or placebo (n = 306). Coprimary end points were investigator-assessed and subject-assessed proportion of subjects achieving a CFL Facial Wrinkle Scale Grade of 0 or 1 (maximum smile; Day 30, Cycle 1). Additional efficacy end points and safety/adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. RESULTS: All primary and secondary end points were achieved; statistically significant differences favored onabotulinumtoxinA (p < .001, all comparisons vs placebo). Investigator and subject responder rates were: CFL, 54.9% and 45.8%; CFL + GL, 59.0% and 48.5%; and placebo, 3.3% (both), respectively. Responder rates on other end points also significantly favored onabotulinumtoxinA treatments. Most AEs were mild or moderate. Two subjects discontinued: 1 serious AE unrelated to treatment (myocardial infarction) and 1 treatment-related AE (injection site pain). CONCLUSION: OnabotulinumtoxinA was effective and well tolerated for treating moderate-to-severe CFL alone or in combination with GL.

An interrater and intrarater reliability study of 3 photographic scales for the classification of perioral aesthetic features.

BACKGROUND: Validated aesthetic rating scales for the perioral area provide objective evaluations for clinical trials and practice. OBJECTIVE: To confirm the reliability of 3 scales for evaluating dermal filler and neurotoxin treatments of the perioral area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three lip-specific photographic scales were developed from standardized 2-dimensional images to evaluate Perioral Lines at Rest (POL), Oral Commissures (OCS), and Perioral Lines at Maximum Contraction (POLM) severity scales. Each 4-grade scale (none to severe) had 3 representative images per grade. Physician validators rated volunteers on each scale (2 rounds of live review). Volunteers provided 2 series of self-assessments. Physician and subject intrarater reliability were based on the comparison of round 1 and round 2 scores (mean weighted kappa coefficient). Other measures were physician interrater agreement (intraclass correlation) and subject/physician interrater agreement (Pearson correlation). RESULTS: Physician intrarater agreement was almost perfect or substantial (POL, 0.725; OCS, 0.789; POLM, 0.826). Overall, physician interrater agreement was almost perfect for all 3 scales and ranged from moderate to substantial by grade. Subject intrarater agreement and subject/physician interrater agreement were substantial. CONCLUSION: All scales demonstrated a high degree of intrarater and interrater reliability during the validation process. Physician concordance was good; subject ratings were reliable and comparable to physician assessments.

OnabotulinumtoxinA dose-ranging study for hyperdynamic perioral lines.

BACKGROUND: Few dosing data on onabotulinumtoxinA to treat hyperdynamic perioral lines (POLs) are available. Studying onabotulinumtoxinA in controlled settings is beneficial to treating a hyperfunctional orbicularis oris. OBJECTIVE: To compare the dose-response relationship of two doses of onabotulinumtoxinA in hyperdynamic POLs. METHODS: Female subjects (N = 60) received injections of onabotulinumtoxinA at four sites totaling 7.5 U or 12.0 U. Subjects returned at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20. POL severity and total lip satisfaction (TLS) were assessed at all visits. RESULTS: Investigator-assessed POL severity was reduced through week 20 for 12.0 U (p < .01). POL reduction for 7.5 U persisted until week 16 (p < .05). Responder rates did not differ until week 12 (12.0 U, 77%; 7.5 U, 36%; p = .003). Subject-assessed TLS was improved (p < .05) at all time points for both groups except at week 20 (12.0 U; p = .06). Most adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate in severity and typical for onabotulinumtoxinA treatment in the lips, and the incidence was dose-dependent. CONCLUSION: OnabotulinumtoxinA provides significant reductions in POL severity and high levels of subject satisfaction. Lack of dose response and fewer AEs suggest that treatment of hyperdynamic POLs with 7.5 U appears adequate for up to 16 weeks.