Safety and Effectiveness of Repeat Treatment With VYC-15L for Lip and Perioral Enhancement: Results From a Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: VYC-15L (Juvéderm Volbella XC) is a nonanimal crosslinked hyaluronic acid (HA) gel with lidocaine. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety and effectiveness of repeat treatment with VYC-15L administered 1 year after treatment for lip and perioral enhancement. METHODS: In this prospective multicenter study, 124 subjects with minimal, mild, or moderate lip fullness on the validated 5-point Allergan Lip Fullness Scale (LFS) who received initial/touch-up treatment with VYC-15L received repeat treatment with VYC-15L 1 year after initial treatment. Effectiveness endpoints included LFS responder rates (≥1-point improvement from baseline) and scores on the FACE-Q Satisfaction With Lips and Appraisal of Lip Lines scales at 1 month after repeat treatment. Subjects completed safety diaries for 30 days after repeat treatment. RESULTS: LFS responder rates were 86.2%, 80.3%, and 65.3% at months 1 and 3 and 1 year, respectively, after initial/touch-up treatment. The responder rate improved to 94.3% 1 month after repeat treatment with VYC-15L and required less median volume vs initial/touch-up treatment (1.5 vs 2.6 mL). FACE-Q scores doubled from baseline at 3 months, remained high through 1 year, and doubled from baseline after repeat treatment. At 1 month after repeat treatment, 96.7% and 89.3% of subjects showed improvement over baseline in FACE-Q Satisfaction With Lips and Appraisal of Lip Lines, respectively. Severe injection site responses were less frequent after repeat treatment than initial/touch-up treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat treatment with VYC-15L at 1 year was safe and effective for lip and perioral enhancement, and required less product volume to achieve similar effectiveness to initial/touch-up treatment.

Performance of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as a reliability index under various distributions in scale reliability studies.

Many published scale validation studies determine inter-rater reliability using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). However, the use of this statistic must consider its advantages, limitations, and applicability. This paper evaluates how interaction of subject distribution, sample size, and levels of rater disagreement affects ICC and provides an approach for obtaining relevant ICC estimates under suboptimal conditions. Simulation results suggest that for a fixed number of subjects, ICC from the convex distribution is smaller than ICC for the uniform distribution, which in turn is smaller than ICC for the concave distribution. The variance component estimates also show that the dissimilarity of ICC among distributions is attributed to the study design (ie, distribution of subjects) component of subject variability and not the scale quality component of rater error variability. The dependency of ICC on the distribution of subjects makes it difficult to compare results across reliability studies. Hence, it is proposed that reliability studies should be designed using a uniform distribution of subjects because of the standardization it provides for representing objective disagreement. In the absence of uniform distribution, a sampling method is proposed to reduce the non-uniformity. In addition, as expected, high levels of disagreement result in low ICC, and when the type of distribution is fixed, any increase in the number of subjects beyond a moderately large specification such as n = 80 does not have a major impact on ICC.

Safety and Effectiveness of the Hyaluronic Acid Dermal Filler VYC-17.5L for Nasolabial Folds: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Juvéderm Vollure XC (VYC-17.5L) belongs to a family of nonanimal hyaluronic acid (HA) gels based on the Vycross technology platform. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of VYC-17.5L for correction of moderate to severe nasolabial folds (NLFs) compared with a control HA dermal filler. METHODS: In this double-blind study, 123 adults with 2 moderate or severe NLFs as measured on the 5-point photonumeric NLF severity scale (NLFSS) were randomized to VYC-17.5L in 1 NLF and control in the contralateral NLF. The coprimary effectiveness end points at Month 6 were difference in improvement in mean NLFSS score for VYC-17.5L versus control and NLFSS responder rate (≥1-point improvement) for VYC-17.5L. RESULTS: The coprimary effectiveness end points were met. NLFSS scores improved by 1.4 with VYC-17.5L and by 1.3 with control; NLFSS responder rate with VYC-17.5L was 93.2%. More than three-quarters of subjects (82%) treated with VYC-17.5L were very satisfied at Month 6. Investigators reported that VYC-17.5L was smoother and more natural looking and easier to inject and mold than control. VYC-17.5L resulted in significantly fewer severe injection site responses than control. CONCLUSION: VYC-17.5L was safe and effective for correcting moderate to severe NLFs, with results lasting through 6 months in 93% of subjects.

Five-Year Safety Data for More than 55,000 Subjects following Breast Implantation: Comparison of Rare Adverse Event Rates with Silicone Implants versus National Norms and Saline Implants.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has required postapproval studies of silicone breast implants to evaluate the incidence of rare adverse events over 10 years after implantation. METHODS: The Breast Implant Follow-Up Study is a large 10-year study (>1000 U.S. sites) evaluating long-term safety following primary augmentation, revision-augmentation, primary reconstruction, or revision-reconstruction with Natrelle round silicone breast implants compared with national norms and outcomes with saline implants. Targeted adverse events in subjects followed for 5 to 8 years included connective tissue diseases, neurologic diseases, cancer, and suicide. RESULTS: The safety population comprised 55,279 women (primary augmentation, n = 42,873; revision-augmentation, n = 6837; primary reconstruction, n = 4828; and revision-reconstruction, n = 741). No targeted adverse events occurred at significantly greater rates in silicone implant groups versus national norms across all indications. The standardized incidence rate (observed/national norm) for all indications combined was 1.4 for cervical/vulvar cancer, 0.8 for brain cancer, 0.3 for multiple sclerosis, and 0.1 for lupus/lupus-like syndrome. Silicone implants did not significantly increase the risk for any targeted adverse events compared with saline implants. The risk of death was similar with silicone versus saline implants across all indications. The suicide rate (10.6 events per 100,000 person-years) was not significantly higher than the national norm. No implant-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Results from 5 to 8 years of follow-up for a large number of subjects confirmed the safety of Natrelle round silicone implants, with no increased risk of systemic disease or suicide versus national norms or saline implants. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Safety and Effectiveness of VYC-15L, a Hyaluronic Acid Filler for Lip and Perioral Enhancement: One-Year Results From a Randomized, Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: VYC-15L (Juvéderm Volbella XC) is a nonanimal crosslinked hyaluronic acid (HA) gel with lidocaine. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of VYC-15L for lip and perioral enhancement versus a nonanimal stabilized HA with lidocaine (Restylane-L; NASHA). METHODS: This prospective multicenter study randomized 225 adults with minimal, mild, or moderate lip fullness on the validated 5-point Allergan Lip Fullness Scale (LFS) to treatment with VYC-15L or NASHA; optional touch-up was administered 30 days later. Subjects were followed for 1 year. The primary effectiveness end point was noninferiority of VYC-15L versus NASHA by mean change in LFS score from baseline to Month 3. RESULTS: The primary end point was met. At Month 3, LFS responder rates were 80.3% for VYC-15L versus 70.8% for NASHA. LFS responder rates exceeded 60% through 1 year with VYC-15L. Perioral lines severity improved for 65.4% and 66.2% of VYC-15L subjects at Month 3 and Year 1, respectively. At Month 3, 96.1% and 88.2% of subjects reported improvement in FACE-Q Satisfaction With Lips and Satisfaction With Lip Lines, respectively. Severe injection site responses were reported less frequently with VYC-15L than NASHA. CONCLUSION: VYC-15L was safe and effective for lip and perioral enhancement, with treatment effects lasting through 1 year.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Volume Deficit of the Hand.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of hand appearance before and after treatment in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Hand Volume Deficit Scale. METHODS: The scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real-subject images for each grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject validation study (N = 296) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A score difference of ≥1 point was shown to reflect a clinically significant difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference, 1.12 [0.99-1.26] for clinically different image pairs and 0.45 [0.33-0.57] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 validation sessions was almost perfect (mean weighted kappa = 0.83). Interrater agreement was almost perfect during the second session (0.82, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Hand Volume Deficit Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating of hand volume deficit.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Assessment of Chin Retrusion.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of chin appearance before and after chin augmentation in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Chin Retrusion Scale. METHODS: The Allergan Chin Retrusion Scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each scale grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of multiple image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject validation study (N = 298) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A difference of ≥1 point on the scale was shown to reflect a clinically meaningful difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference, 1.07 [0.94-1.20] for clinically different image pairs and 0.51 [0.39-0.63] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 live-subject validation sessions was substantial (mean weighted kappa = 0.79). Interrater agreement was substantial during the second rating session (0.68, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Chin Retrusion Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating of severity of chin retrusion.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Facial Skin Texture.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of facial skin roughness before and after aesthetic treatment in practice and in clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Skin Roughness Scale. METHODS: The scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject validation study (N = 290) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A score difference of ≥1 point was shown to reflect a clinically meaningful difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference 1.09 [0.96-1.23] for clinically different image pairs and 0.53 [0.38-0.67] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 validation sessions was almost perfect (weighted kappa = 0.83). Interrater agreement was almost perfect during the second rating session (0.81, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Skin Roughness Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating of midface skin roughness.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Facial Fine Lines.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of facial fine lines before and after treatment in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Fine Lines Scale. METHODS: The Allergan Fine Lines Scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each scale grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of multiple image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live subject validation study (N = 289) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A score difference of ≥1 point was shown to reflect a clinically significant difference (mean [95% CI] absolute score difference, 1.06 [0.92-1.21] for clinically different image pairs and 0.50 [0.38-0.61] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 live subject validation sessions was almost perfect (weighted kappa = 0.85). Interrater agreement was substantial during the second rating session (0.76, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Fine Lines Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating of severity of superficial fine lines.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Volume Deficit of the Temple.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of temple appearance before and after aesthetic treatment in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Temple Hollowing Scale. METHODS: The scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject validation study (N = 298) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A score difference of ≥1 point was shown to reflect a clinically significant difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference, 1.1 [0.94-1.26] for clinically different image pairs and 0.67 [0.51-0.83] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 validation sessions was almost perfect (mean weighted kappa = 0.86). Interrater agreement was almost perfect during the second session (0.81, primary endpoint). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Temple Hollowing Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating of temple volume deficit.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Transverse Neck Lines.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of horizontal neck lines before and after treatment in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Transverse Neck Lines Scale. METHODS: The Allergan Transverse Neck Lines Scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each scale grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of multiple image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject rating validation study (N = 297) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A difference of ≥1 point on the scale was shown to reflect a clinically significant difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference, 1.22 [1.09-1.35] for clinically different image pairs and 0.57 [0.42-0.72] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 live-subject rating validation sessions was substantial (mean weighted kappa = 0.78). Interrater agreement was substantial during the second rating session (0.73, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Transverse Neck Lines Scale is a validated and reliable scale for rating of severity of neck lines.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Static Horizontal Forehead Lines.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of static forehead lines before and after treatment in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Forehead Lines Scale. METHODS: The Allergan Forehead Lines Scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each scale grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of multiple image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject validation study (N = 295) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A difference of ≥1 point on the scale was shown to reflect a clinically significant difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference, 1.06 [0.91-1.21] for clinically different image pairs and 0.38 [0.26-0.51] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 live-subject validation sessions was almost perfect (mean weighted kappa = 0.87). Interrater agreement was almost perfect during the second rating session (0.86, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Forehead Lines Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating of static horizontal forehead lines.

Development and Validation of a Photonumeric Scale for Evaluation of Infraorbital Hollows.

BACKGROUND: A validated scale is needed for objective and reproducible comparisons of infraorbital hollows (i.e., tear troughs) before and after treatment in practice and clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and validation of the 5-point photonumeric Allergan Infraorbital Hollows Scale. METHODS: The scale was developed to include an assessment guide, verbal descriptors, morphed images, and real subject images for each grade. The clinical significance of a 1-point score difference was evaluated in a review of image pairs representing varying differences in severity. Interrater and intrarater reliability was evaluated in a live-subject validation study (N = 297) completed during 2 sessions occurring 3 weeks apart. RESULTS: A score difference of ≥1 point was shown to reflect a clinically significant difference (mean [95% confidence interval] absolute score difference, 0.90 [0.79-1.02] for clinically different image pairs and 0.33 [0.19-0.46] for not clinically different pairs). Intrarater agreement between the 2 validation sessions was substantial (mean weighted kappa = 0.79). Interrater agreement was substantial during the second rating session (0.70, primary end point). CONCLUSION: The Allergan Infraorbital Hollows Scale is a validated and reliable scale for physician rating severity of hollowing in the infraorbital area.

Detection and relevance of naftifine hydrochloride in the stratum corneum up to four weeks following the last application of naftifine cream and gel, 2%.

BACKGROUND: Two-week treatment using naftifine cream or gel, 2% has been shown to be efficacious in subjects with Tinea pedis and/or Tinea cruris, and in most cases, continued improvement has been observed following cessation of treatment for up to four weeks. One possible explanation for continuous post-treatment improvement is drug-levels remaining in the stratum corneum (SC) as a function of time. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to use tape stripping methodology to assess the amount of drug available in the SC over a 28 day period following the last dose. METHODS: This was an open-label, single-exposure study on subjects comparing the amount of drug that was absorbed into the SC following topical application for 2-weeks. Twelve subjects were dosed daily (6 with naftifine cream, 2% and 6 with naftifine gel, 2%). Subjects had twelve 8 cm2 test application sites demarcated on the upper back. Twenty-five individual sequential strips were obtained from each test site. Of these, 11 sites were dosed once daily with the drug (5.0µL/cm2) for days 1 to 14 and the final site served as the control. On days 15, 29, and 43, a site was stripped to collect the SC in order to process the amount of drug present. RESULTS: Naftifine was present on all tape strip samples collected over the 28 day period following two weeks of application. Furthermore, the most relevant, deeper tape strip sets reflecting the SC, showed potentially clinically relevant presence of naftifine in the skin for 28-days post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Naftifine was present in the tape strips on all sample collection days up to and including four weeks following the last drug application. These findings help explain the progressive improvement in clinical and mycological response rates during the treatment period and for up to four weeks post-treatment in the clinical trials using naftifine.

Efficacy and safety of naftifine HCl Gel 2% in the treatment of interdigital and moccasin type tinea pedis: pooled results from two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Tinea pedis is the most common chronic fungal infection. Naftifine hydrochloride is a topical antifungal of the allylamine class, displaying fungicidal activity and clinically significant anti-bacterial and anti-inflammatory effects. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of two-weeks once daily application of naftifine gel 2% in the treatment of tinea pedis. METHODS: At baseline, 1715 subjects were randomly assigned 2:1 to naftifine gel 2% (n=1144) and vehicle (n=571). Efficacy consisting of mycologic determination (KOH and dermatophyte cultures) and scoring of clinical symptom severity was evaluated at baseline and weeks 2, 4, and 6. Efficacy was analyzed in 1174 subjects (n=782, naftifine; n=392, vehicle) with a positive baseline dermatophyte culture and KOH for whom week 6 assessments were available. Safety was evaluated by adverse events (AE) and laboratory values in 1714 subjects (n=1143, naftifine; n=571, vehicle). RESULTS: Subjects treated with naftifine gel 2% for interdigital-type tinea pedis demonstrated greater improvement from baseline for complete cure (P=0.001), mycological cure (P<0.0001), and treatment effectiveness (P<0.0001) as early as 2 weeks when compared to vehicle; however the highest response rates were seen 4-weeks post treatment (P<0.0001, for all endpoints). Statistically significant results for complete cure, mycological cure, and treatment effectiveness (P<0.0001, for all endpoints) were also seen at week 6 among subjects with moccasin-type tinea pedis. Treatment related adverse events were minimal. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with naftifine gel 2% applied once daily for two weeks is well-tolerated and is effective in treating both interdigital-type and moccasin-type tinea pedis. Continuous improvement is observed from the end of treatment to four-weeks after treatment cessation among key outcome measures (complete cure, mycological cure, and treatment effectiveness) as well as clinical signs and symptoms (erythema, scaling, and pruritus)

A new proprietary onion extract gel improves the appearance of new scars: a randomized, controlled, blinded-investigator study.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, controlled, single-blind study evaluated the appearance of new dermal scars after eight weeks of once-daily application of a nonprescription proprietary onion extract gel formulation compared to control (no application scars) in a dermatological surgical setting. METHODS: At Visit 1, 44 healthy male and female subjects aged 18 to 70 years gave informed consent, were screened, and enrolled in the study. Two bilateral, 8mm seborrheic keratoses, one on the right and one on the left chest, were surgically removed from each subject. The wounds were photographed at all visits. Two weeks later (Visit 2), each subject was randomly assigned to apply onion extract gel to either the right or left side wound site once daily for eight weeks and no treatment on the opposite wound. The investigator was blinded to which wound was treated. At two, four, and eight weeks after gel application, right and left scars were graded by the investigator and subjects for improvement from baseline in overall appearance, texture, redness, and softness using 4-point ordinal scales (0=no improvement, 1=mild improvement; 2= moderate improvement; 3=significant improvement). Safety was evaluated by adverse events. RESULTS: Six subjects (13.6%) experienced mild stinging that resolved spontaneously. At two weeks, the subjects rated gel-applied scars to be significantly softer than control scars (p=0.014). After four and eight weeks of application, the investigator and subjects rated all appearance variables of the gel-applied scars to be significantly more improved from baseline than control scars (p=0.017 to p<0.01). CONCLUSION: The new proprietary onion extract gel is safe and significantly improves scar appearance after four weeks of once-daily application.

An open-label pilot study of naftifine 1% gel in the treatment of seborrheic dermatitis of the scalp.

Topical antifungal treatment is a mainstay of therapy for Seborrehic Dermatitis (SD). Although the amidazole and ciclopyridine antifungals have been extensively studied, few clinical efficacy data are available for topical allylamine therapy in SD. The objective of this open-label exploratory study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of natifine HCl 1% gel applied twice daily for 4 weeks, as topical treatment of moderate SD of the scalp. Nine subjects (5 men, 4 women) with a mean age of 56 (33-81) years with SD of the scalp were enrolled and made 4 visits to the site. At Visit 1 (Week 0), subjects were screened, enrolled, baseline efficacy data were obtained, and treatment was initiated. Subjects returned at Week 2, Week 4 (end of treatment), and Week 6 for efficacy and safety assessments. Efficacy was evaluated by changes from baseline in investigator-rated scores on 0-5-grade scales: (1) SD Global Evaluation Scale (SDGES), (2) Erythema Severity Scale, (3) Scaling Severity Scale, (4) % Scalp Involvement Scale, and subject-rated scores on the (4) Itching Severity Scale, and (5) Global Improvement Scale, where 0=none and 5=most severe. Mean severity scores for the SDGES and % Scalp Involvement scales progressively declined (improved) 66% and 54% from respective baseline levels at Week 6. Mean erythema rating decreased 38% from baseline and scaling decreased 50% from baseline by Weeks 4 and 6. Itching improved in 5 of 9 (56%) subjects by the end of treatment. A total of 8 of 9 (89%) subjects rated their symptoms as improved from baseline at the end of treatment and Week 6. There were no treatment-related adverse events during the study. These results suggest that naftifine 1% gel applied twice daily for 4 weeks is effective and safe topical treatment for moderate SD of the scalp.

Validated composite assessment scales for the global face.

BACKGROUND: Twenty grading scales have been developed to assess age-related facial changes. Until now, the validity with regard to the patient's actual age and the clinical importance of combined measurement tools to describe facial aging was unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability and validity of a total face score and three global face assessment scales for estimated age, estimated aesthetic treatment effort, and signs of aging in the facial units. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Descriptive, reliability, correlation, and principal component analyses based on the assessment of 50 subjects by 12 raters using the 20 grading scales and the global face assessment scales. RESULTS: Inter- and intrarater reliability was high for the total face score and for the scales on estimated age and aesthetic treatment effort. Actual age was highly correlated with these three measures. Facial aging was indicated particularly by scales of the lower face. CONCLUSION: The aesthetic grading scales and global scales on estimated age and aesthetic treatment effort are reliable and valid instruments. The results suggest that a more-comprehensive evaluation of the human face and its age-related changes can help to identify important areas of facial aging and to define optimal aesthetic treatment strategies.

Validated assessment scales for the upper face.

BACKGROUND: Age-related upper face changes such as wrinkles, lines, volume loss, and anatomic alterations may affect quality of life and psychological well-being. The development of globally accepted tools to assess these changes objectively is an essential contribution to aesthetic research and routine clinical medicine. OBJECTIVE: To establish the reliability of several upper face scales for clinical research and practice: forehead lines, glabellar lines, crow's feet (at rest and dynamic expression), sex-specific brow positioning, and summary scores of forehead and crow's feet areas and of the entire upper face unit. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four 5-point photonumerical rating scales were developed to assess glabellar lines and sex-specific brow positioning. Twelve experts rated identical upper face photographs of 50 subjects in two separate rating cycles using all eight scales. Responses of raters were analyzed to assess intra- and interrater reliability. RESULTS: Interrater reliability was substantial for all upper face scales, aesthetic areas, and the upper face score except for the brow positioning scales. Intrarater reliability was high for all scales and resulting scores. CONCLUSION: Except for brow positioning, the upper face rating scales are reliable tools for valid and reproducible assessment of the aging process.

Validated assessment scales for the mid face.

BACKGROUND: The improvement of aesthetic treatment options for age-related mid face changes, such as volume loss, and the increase in patient expectations necessitates the development of more-complex and globally accepted assessment tools. OBJECTIVE: To develop three grading scales for objective assessment of the infraorbital hollow and upper and lower cheek fullness and to establish the reliability of these scales for clinical research and practice. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three 5-point rating scales were developed to assess infraorbital hollow and upper and lower cheek fullness objectively. Twelve experts rated identical mid face photographs of 50 subjects in two separate rating cycles using the mid face scales. Test responses of raters were analyzed to assess intra- and interrater reliability. RESULTS: Interrater reliability was substantial for the infraorbital hollow, upper cheek fullness, and lower cheek fullness scales. Intrarater reliability was high for all three scales. Both of the cheek fullness scales yielded higher reliabilities when three rather than two views were used to assess the volume changes of the cheek. CONCLUSION: The mid face scales are reliable tools for valid and reproducible assessment of age-related mid face changes.