ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2015
IncobotulinumtoxinA use in aesthetic indications in daily practice: a European multicenter, noninterventional, retrospective study.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03136341 (A Placebo-controlled, Double-blind, Randomized, Cross Over Pilot Study of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Abobotulinum Toxin A), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Placebo-controlled, Double-blind, Randomized, Cross Over Pilot Study of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Abobotulinum Toxin A (Dysport) as a Treatment for Task-dependent Upper Limb Tremor
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aesthetic Improvements Over Time: Long-Term Efficacy and Additional Outcomes of IncobotulinumtoxinA in the Simultaneous Treatment of Upper Facial Lines.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Trial
- Italian Expert Consensus on the Efficacy and Safety of High Doses of Incobotulinum Toxin A (BocoutureDermatology and therapy · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of IncobotulinumtoxinA for the Simultaneous Treatment of Upper Facial Lines: A GRADE Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Review
- IncobotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Glabella and Forehead Dynamic Lines: A Real-Life Longitudinal Case Series.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2023Article
- IncobotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Glabellar Frown Lines: A Prospective, Multicenter, Single-arm Study in Taiwan.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2019Article
- Efficacy and patient satisfaction with incobotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of glabellar frown lines.Singapore medical journal · 2017Observational
- Treatment of Lateral Periorbital Lines with Different Dilutions of IncobotulinumtoxinA.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo characterize utilization patterns and treatment satisfaction with incobotulinumtoxinA for aesthetic indications and assess adherence to the Summary of Product Characteristics. PATIENTS AND
methodsData were collected retrospectively from physicians in Germany, France, and the UK regarding patients (n=638) treated with incobotulinumtoxinA for aesthetic indications. Data on indication, treatment interval, dose injected, physician and patient satisfaction, and adverse drug reactions were recorded according to routine daily practice.
resultsMost patients (76.0%) received incobotulinumtoxinA for glabellar frown lines (GFL) and were given doses of ≤20 U. The majority of treatment intervals were 5 months or longer. Overall, 64.1% of patients were treated for off-label indications, sometimes in combination with treatment for GFL. The most frequently treated off-label indications were horizontal forehead lines (38.6%) and/or crow's feet (CF; 31.7%); for CF, >95% of injected doses were ≤24 U. In Germany, a smaller proportion of patients were given incobotulinumtoxinA treatment for CF (27.6%), compared with France (40.4%) and the UK (33.2%), although country-specific differences were less prominent when treatment cycle data for CF were examined. Treatment satisfaction among physicians and patients (overall, and for GFL specifically) was very high, with excellent tolerability and only one mild adverse drug reaction reported.
conclusionIn daily practice, incobotulinumtoxinA is mainly used for GFL; however, its use for CF and horizontal forehead lines (often in combination with GFL) is relatively common. Treatment satisfaction across aesthetic indications is high, and incobotulinumtoxinA is well tolerated, with time intervals of 5 months or longer between injections in the majority of cases. When considering factors such as dose and treatment interval, adherence to the Summary of Product Characteristics when treating GFL in daily practice is good. These results support previous reports that incobotulinumtoxinA is an effective treatment for GFL, with an excellent safety profile. Furthermore, incobotulinumtoxinA may display efficacy and tolerability in other indications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.