Trial reportAesthetic surgery journal2022
Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Liquid AbobotulinumtoxinA Formulation for Moderate-to-Severe Glabellar Lines: A Phase III, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled and Open-Label Study.
Trial report in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02493946 (Phase III, Randomised, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled and Open Label Phase Multicentre Study to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of BTX-A-HAC NG in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines, and Assess the Long Term Efficacy and Safety of BTX-A-HAC NG Following Repeated Treatments in This Indication), 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.
Phase III, Randomised, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled and Open Label Phase Multicentre Study to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of BTX-A-HAC NG in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines, and Assess the Long Term Efficacy and Safety of BTX-A-HAC NG Following Repeated Treatments in This Indication
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is Ready-To-Use AbobotulinumtoxinA More Effective Than OnabotulinumtoxinA for Glabellar Lines? A Randomized, Controlled, Triple-Blinded Clinical Trial.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Trial
- Comparing Ready-to-Use and Powder AbobotulinumtoxinA for Glabellar Lines: A Randomized, Controlled, Triple-Blinded Clinical Trial.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Trial
- NivobotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines With or Without Concurrent Treatment of Lateral Canthal Lines in Two Phase 3 Clinical Trials.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2025Trial
- Review
- Revealing the Patient Perspective: Evolution of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Botulinum Toxin Studies in Aesthetic Medicine.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Review
- International Consensus Recommendations on the Aesthetic Usage of Ready-to-Use AbobotulinumtoxinA (Alluzience).Aesthetic surgery journal · 2024Article
- Efficacy and Safety Analysis of Botox Application and Iatrogenic Botulism: Panacea or Peril?Current pharmaceutical design · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA ready-to-use liquid formulation of abobotulinumtoxinA (aboBoNT-A solution) has been developed.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of aboBoNT-A solution for the treatment of glabellar lines.
methodsThis was a multicenter, multinational, Phase III study (NCT02493946), with randomized double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC; 2:1 aboBoNT-A solution 50 U/placebo) and open-label (4 cycles aboBoNT-A solution) periods; additional patients were recruited into the open-label period. Patients were 18 to 65 years old, BoNT-naïve, and dissatisfied/very dissatisfied with moderate/severe glabellar lines at maximum frown. Investigator's live assessment (primary endpoint)/subject's self-assessment of glabellar line severity at maximum frown, patient satisfaction with glabellar line appearance, and FACE-Q patient-reported scales (facial appearance overall, psychological well-being, aging) were assessed. Adverse events were monitored. Analyses were performed on DBPC and long-term analysis (LTA; all patients receiving ≥1 aboBoNT-A solution injection) populations.
resultsResponder rates for the investigator's live assessment, the subject's self-assessment, and patient satisfaction were consistent at Day 29 postinjection across repeat LTA cycles (82.2%-87.8%, 62.8%-80.6%, and 72.2%-87.8%, respectively), with statistically significantly higher responder rates vs placebo (DBPC cycle: 81.6% vs 0.8%, 68.1% vs 2.3%, and 83.1% vs 5.7%, respectively; all P < 0.0001). Consistent improvements on FACE-Q scales occurred with repeat cycles (DBPC cycle: aboBoNT-A solution vs placebo, P < 0.0001). No new or unexpected adverse events, or neutralizing antibodies, were observed.
conclusionsThese results support the long-term efficacy and safety of aboBoNT-A solution, and its superiority over placebo, for treatment of glabellar lines in adults. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:
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.