Ready‐to‐use abobotulinumtoxinA solution versus powder botulinumtoxinA for treatment of glabellar lines: Investigators' and subjects' experience in a Phase IV study

Priyanka Chadha,Peter Arne Gerber,Said Hilton,Beatriz Molina,Syed Haq,Jackie Partridge,Vincent Wong,Klaus Hoffmann,Cecilia Persson,Inna Prygova
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.16359
2024-05-30
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology
Abstract:Background Botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT‐A) is well‐established for treatment of glabellar lines (GLs), and mostly formulated as powders requiring reconstitution for injection. The approved liquid formulation, ready‐to‐use (RTU) abobotulinumtoxinA was developed to ease injection procedures and prevent reconstitution errors. This multicenter, open‐label, Phase IV study evaluated GL treatment experience using RTU abobotulinumtoxinA versus powder BoNT‐A (onabotulinumtoxinA). Methods Females with experience of BoNT‐A facial treatment were randomized 2:1 to GL treatment with 50 U RTU abobotulinumtoxinA (N = 99) or 20 U powder BoNT‐A (N = 51) and followed‐up for 6 months or 1 month, respectively. Assessments included: time to prepare each product for injection (primary endpoint); investigators' experience with product preparation/reconstitution; investigators' and subjects' treatment experience; safety; and for the RTU product: aesthetic improvement of GLs; subject satisfaction. Results Compared with powder BoNT‐A, RTU abobotulinumtoxinA required statistically significantly less preparation time (mean 0:33 vs. 1:34 min: s; p
dermatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?