ReviewJPRAS open2026
TrenibotulinumtoxinE: Pharmacology, clinical evidence, and emerging role in aesthetic medicine.
Review in JPRAS open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT/A) products are among the most popular aesthetic treatments worldwide, but their relatively prolonged duration may be a barrier for patients who are concerned about unnatural appearance, adverse effects, or being committed to an unwanted result. TrenibotulinumtoxinE (trenibotE), a botulinum neurotoxin type E formulation, has a distinctly rapid onset and shorter duration of action, providing a pharmacologic profile that differs from currently available BoNT/A products and may better meet the needs of certain patients seeking greater treatment flexibility. This narrative review summarizes the pharmacology, clinical development, efficacy, safety, and potential aesthetic role of trenibotE based on preclinical and clinical studies. Preclinical studies demonstrate a more rapid onset and shorter duration of neuromuscular effect with trenibotE than with BoNT/A, likely reflecting differences in intracellular persistence, receptor interactions, and SNAP-25 cleavage. In clinical studies of moderate-to-severe glabellar lines (GL), improvement was evident within 8-24 hours, with peak efficacy around Day 7 and return toward baseline by approximately Day 21. Phase 3 trials reported that approximately 60%-66% of trenibotE-treated participants achieved a ≥ 2-grade improvement to none or mild GL severity at Day 7. Patient-reported outcomes showed high satisfaction, including satisfaction with natural-looking results and improvement in the psychological impact of GL. TrenibotE was generally well tolerated, with low rates of treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-emergent neutralizing antibodies reported. TrenibotE represents a rapid-onset, short-acting neuromodulator with a clinical profile that may complement existing BoNT/A treatments. Its shorter duration may be particularly appealing to toxin-naive or treatment-hesitant patients and may provide greater flexibility for individualized aesthetic treatment. Further studies are needed to characterize repeated use, long-term safety and immunogenicity, diffusion, dose optimization, treatment of non-glabellar areas, and direct comparisons with BoNT/A.
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.