Trial reportAesthetic surgery journal2025
NivobotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines With or Without Concurrent Treatment of Lateral Canthal Lines in Two Phase 3 Clinical Trials.
Trial report in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- NivobotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Lateral Canthal Lines Alone and With Concurrent Treatment of Glabellar Lines.Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.] · 2026Trial
- Cosmetic Medicine and Aesthetic Surgery Journal: The Beautiful Bond Between Noninvasive Aesthetic Medicine and Plastic Surgery.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBotulinum neurotoxins in aesthetic medicine require reconstitution before administration, which may be inconvenient and present errors among injectors.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ready-to-use nivobotulinumtoxinA liquid formulation for the treatment of glabellar lines (GL) with or without treatment of lateral canthal lines (LCL).
methodsTwo multicenter, phase 3, double-blind, randomized trials enrolled participants with moderate-to-severe GL (Study 001) or moderate-to-severe GL + LCL (Study 005). Participants received double-blind nivobotulinumtoxinA (20 U) or placebo (Period 1) then ≤2 open-label nivobotulinumtoxinA GL treatments (Period 2) in Study 001 or double-blind nivobotulinumtoxinA 20 U (GL), nivobotulinumtoxinA 44 U (GL + LCL), or placebo (Period 1) then ≤2 double-blind injections of the same treatment (Period 2) in Study 005. The composite primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving a ≥2-grade improvement on a facial wrinkle scale at maximum frown on investigator and participant assessment; coprimary endpoints were investigator- and participant-assessed FWS "none or mild" ratings.
resultsAt Day 30, significantly higher responder rates were observed for the composite primary endpoint with GL treatment alone (Study 001, 46.1%; Study 005, 45.1%) and GL + LCL (Study 005, 41.3%) vs placebo (0%; all P < .001). Responder rates of "none or mild" by investigator and participant assessment, respectively, were significantly higher for GL treatment alone (Study 001, 77.2% and 65.0%; Study 005, 74.3% and 68.8%) and GL + LCL (Study 005, 74.0% and 61.2%) vs placebo (all P < .001). Adverse events were similar between treatment groups and placebo.
conclusionsLiquid nivobotulinumtoxinA was effective and well tolerated for treating moderate-to-severe GL alone or with LCL. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 (THERAPEUTIC):
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.