Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02450526

Dysport in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines in Chinese Subjects

The objective of this study is to demonstrate the efficacy of Dysport for the improvement in appearance of moderate to severe glabellar lines and to assess the short term and long term safety of Dysport, used for the improvement in appearance of moderate to severe glabellar lines in Chinese subjects.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Glabellar Lines

Age range

18 year–65 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 3

Primary location

Air Force General Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China

Loading trial locations.

About this study

The first treatment cycle will be double blind and subjects will be randomised to receive Dysport, Botox or placebo. After the first treatment cycle, all subjects will receive a maximum of four treatment cycles with Dysport, occurring at intervals of no less than 84 Days (12 weeks) between each treatment cycle, depending upon individual duration of response to Dysport treatment.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Provision of written informed consent
  • Male or female Chinese subjects who are between 18 to 65 years of age inclusive.
  • Have moderate or severe wrinkles of vertical glabellar lines (Grade 2 or 3) at maximum frown at baseline (Day 1), as assessed by the subject using SSA.
  • Have moderate or severe (Grade 2 or 3) vertical glabellar lines at maximum frown at baseline (Day 1), as assessed by the Investigator using ILA.
  • Be Botulinum Toxin (BTX) naïve or have received their most recent BTX-A treatment more than 1 year prior to screening.
  • Have a negative pregnancy test
  • Have an understanding of the study

Exclusion criteria

  • Any prior surgery affecting corrugator supercilii, prior blepharoplasty or brow lift, dermal resurfacing, or any prior cosmetic procedures or scars within 36 months.
  • Any prior treatment with permanent fillers in the upper face.
  • Any prior treatment with nonpermanent dermal fillers in the upper face within the past 3 years and/or skin abrasions/resurfacing, photorejuvenation or skin/vascular laser intervention within the past 12 months.
  • Any planned facial cosmetic surgery or procedures during the study period.
  • Lack of capacity to frown.
  • Facial conditions that could affect safety or efficacy results.
  • History of facial nerve palsy.
  • Marked asymmetry; ptosis; excessive dermatochalasis; deep dermal scarring; thick sebaceous skin; photodamage etc.
  • Presence of any condition that could affect the safety, conduct or outcome of the study.
  • Any subjects who have any psychiatric illness or are taking antidepressant, anxiolytic or antipsychotic medication.
  • Pregnant and/or lactating female subjects.
  • Female subjects of childbearing potential not willing to use contraceptive measures throughout the course of the study.
  • History of drug or alcohol abuse.
  • Treatment with an experimental drug or device within 30 days prior to screening for this study and during the conduct of this study.
  • Requirement for BTX injection to site(s) for disorders other than glabellar lines.
  • Known allergy or hypersensitivity to BTX.
  • Any medical condition or laboratory finding from central laboratory results.
  • The subject is unable and/or unwilling to comply fully with the protocol and the study.
  • Mental incapacity, unwillingness or language barriers.

Treatment and study plan

Botulinum toxin type A

Biological

Other names: AbobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®)

Placebo

Drug

50 Units

Primary outcomes

  1. Superiority Analysis of The Percentage of Responders Measured by the Investigator's Live Assessment (ILA) at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1, Day 29 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 29.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and at Cycle 1, Day 29, the Investigator assessed the appearance of the glabellar lines at maximum frown using a validated 4-point Photographic Scale of Glabellar Line Severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at Cycle 1, Day 29, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at maximum frown at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for Cycle 1, Day 29.

  2. Superiority Analysis of The Percentage of Responders Measured by the SSA at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1, Day 29 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 29.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and at Cycle 1, Day 29, subjects assessed the appearance of their glabellar lines at maximum frown using a 4-point categorical scale. The 4-point scale represents the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (no wrinkles), Grade 1 (mild wrinkles), Grade 2 (moderate wrinkles) and Grade 3 (severe wrinkles). For the SSA, a responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at maximum frown at Cycle 1, Day 29, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at maximum frown at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for Cycle 1, Day 29.

  3. Non-Inferiority Analysis of The Percentage of Responders Measured by the Investigator's Live Assessment (ILA) at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1, Day 29 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 29.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and at Cycle 1, Day 29, the Investigator assessed the appearance of the glabellar lines at maximum frown using a validated 4-point Photographic Scale of Glabellar Line Severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at Cycle 1, Day 29, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at maximum frown at baseline.

    Non Inferiority analysis of Dysport® versus Botox was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for Cycle 1, Day 29.

Secondary outcomes

  1. The Percentage of Responders With Respect to Independent Reviewer's Assessment of Photographs of the Subject's Glabellar Lines at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1, Day 29 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 29.

    Photographs of the glabellar region of subjects were taken at maximum frown at baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and at Cycle 1, Day 29. Photographs were assessed by an Independent Experts Committee using a validated 4-point Photographic Scale of Glabellar Line Severity which rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). The median of three readings by three independent reviewers was used in the analysis. A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at Cycle 1, Day 29, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment to placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for Cycle 1, Day 29.

  2. Mean Subject's Global Assessment (SGA) Score at Cycle 1, Day 29 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 29.

    On Cycle 1, Day 29, subjects were asked to assess the change, since the last treatment administration, in the appearance of their glabellar lines using the following 9-point Global Assessment Scale: +4 =100% improvement; +3 =75% improvement; +2 =50% improvement; +1 =25% improvement; 0 =no change; -1 =25% worsening; -2 =50%worsening; -3 =75% worsening; -4 =100% worsening.

    The mean SGA score at Cycle 1, Day 29 is presented.

  3. The Percentage of Responders With Respect to the SGA Score at Cycle 1, Day 29 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 29.

    On Cycle 1, Day 29, subjects were asked to assess the change, since the last treatment administration, in the appearance of their glabellar lines using the following 9-point Global Assessment Scale: +4 =100% improvement; +3 =75% improvement; +2 =50% improvement; +1 =25% improvement; 0 =no change; -1 =25% worsening; -2 =50% worsening; -3 =75% worsening; -4 =100% worsening. A responder, based on the SGA scale, was defined as having a grade of at least +2 (50% improvement).

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for Cycle 1, Day 29.

Other outcomes

  1. The Percentage of Responders Measured by the ILA at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1 Study Visits (DB Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 1, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and at all subsequent study visits, the Investigator assessed the appearance of the glabellar lines at maximum frown using a validated 4-point photographic scale of glabellar line severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at any given visit, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for all visits up to Day 85 in the DB period (except Cycle 1, Day 29).

  2. The Percentage of Responders Measured by the SSA at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1 Study Visits (DB Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 1, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and all subsequent study visits, subjects assessed the appearance of their glabellar lines at maximum frown using a 4-point categorical scale. The 4-point scale represents the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (no wrinkles), Grade 1 (mild wrinkles), Grade 2 (moderate wrinkles) and Grade 3 (severe wrinkles). For the SSA, a responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at maximum frown at any given visit, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at maximum frown at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for all visits up to Day 85 in the DB period (except Cycle 1, Day 29).

  3. The Percentage of Responders Measured by the ILA at Rest at Cycle 1 Study Visits (DB Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 1, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and at all subsequent study visits, the Investigator assessed the appearance of the glabellar lines at rest using a validated 4-point photographic scale of glabellar line severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at rest at any given visit, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at rest at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for all visits up to Day 85 in the DB period (except Cycle 1, Day 29).

  4. The Percentage of Responders With Respect to Independent Reviewer's Assessment of Photographs of the Subject's Glabellar Lines at Maximum Frown at Cycle 1, Day 85 (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 85.

    Photographs of the glabellar region of subjects were taken at baseline and at maximum frown at Cycle 1, Day 85. Photographs were assessed by an Independent Experts Committee using a validated 4-point Photographic Scale of Glabellar Line Severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). The median of 3 readings by 3 independent reviewers was used in the analysis. A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at Cycle 1, Day 85, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at baseline.

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for Cycle 1, Day 85 .

  5. Mean SGA Score at Cycle 1 Study Visits (DB Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 1, Day 85.

    On all study visits, subjects were asked to assess the change, since the last treatment administration, in the appearance of their glabellar lines using the following 9-point Global Assessment Scale: +4 =100% improvement; +3 =75% improvement; +2 =50% improvement; +1 =25% improvement; 0 =no change; -1 =25% worsening; -2 =50% worsening; -3 =75% worsening; -4 =100% worsening.

    The mean SGA score for study visits on Day 8 to Day 85 in the DB period is presented (except Cycle 1, Day 29).

  6. The Percentage of Responders With Respect to the SGA Score at Cycle 1 Study Visits (DB Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 1, Day 85.

    On all study visits, subjects were asked to assess the change, since the last treatment administration, in the appearance of their glabellar lines using the following 9-point Global Assessment Scale: +4 =100% improvement; +3 =75% improvement; +2 =50% improvement; +1 =25% improvement; 0 =no change; -1 =25% worsening; -2 =50%worsening; -3 =75% worsening; -4 =100% worsening. A responder, based on the SGA scale, was defined as having a grade of at least +2 (50% improvement).

    Superiority analysis of active treatment versus placebo was carried out using a multivariate logistic regression model and adjusted for the stratification factors of gender and baseline severity score of glabellar lines at maximum frown measured by the ILA. The adjusted percentage of responders is presented for all visits up to Day 85 in the DB period (except Cycle 1, Day 29).

  7. Least Squares (LS) Mean Change From Baseline in Subject's Self-perception of Age at Cycle 1 Study Visits (DB Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 1, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and all subsequent study visits in Cycle 1, subjects were asked to evaluate their age over the past 7 days at the time of assessment, using the following categories:

    • I look like my current age;
    • I look _ years younger;
    • I look _ years older.

    The LS mean change from baseline in subject's self-perception of age at all study visits in the DB Period was calculated. A negative LS mean change from baseline in the subject's self-perception of age indicates that the subject's self-perception was to look younger compared with baseline.

  8. The Time to Onset of Treatment Response Based on the Subject's Diary Card (DB Period).

    Time frame: At Cycle 1, Day 8.

    Subjects were given the diary card at baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1 ) and asked to record their assessment of study treatment response for the first 7 days post-treatment (Days 2 to 8). They were asked to respond 'yes' or 'no' to the following question: 'Since being injected have you noticed an improvement in the appearance of your glabellar lines (lines between your eyebrows)?' Subjects with no treatment response were censored at the date of last assessment of treatment response recorded in the diary card.

    The 50th percentile of Kaplan-Meier estimates was used to estimate the median time to onset of treatment response for each treatment group.

  9. The Percentage of Responders Measured by the ILA at Maximum Frown at All Other Study Visits (OL Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 5, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and all subsequent study visits (per treatment cycle) in the OL period, the Investigator assessed the appearance of the glabellar lines at maximum frown using a validated 4-point Photographic Scale of Glabellar Line Severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at each study visit, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at baseline.

    The proportion (percentage) of responders measured by ILA at all study visits in each treatment cycle, is presented.

  10. The Percentage of Responders Measured by the SSA at Maximum Frown at All Other Study Visits (OL Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 5, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and all subsequent study visits per treatment cycle in the OL period, subjects assessed the appearance of their glabellar lines at maximum frown using a 4-point categorical scale. The 4-point scale represents the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (no wrinkles), Grade 1 (mild wrinkles), Grade 2 (moderate wrinkles) and Grade 3 (severe wrinkles). For the SSA, a responder was defined as having a severity grade of no wrinkles (0) or mild wrinkles (1) at maximum frown at a given visit and a severity grade of moderate wrinkles (2) or severe wrinkles (3) at maximum frown at baseline.

    The proportion (percentage) of responders measured by SSA at all study visits in Cycle 2 to 5 is presented.

  11. The Percentage of Responders Measured by the ILA at Rest at All Study Visits (OL Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 5, Day 85.

    At baseline (Cycle 1, Day 1) and all subsequent study visits per treatment cycle in the OL period, the Investigator assessed the appearance of the glabellar lines at rest using a validated 4-point Photographic Scale of Glabellar Line Severity. This 4-point scale rated the severity of glabellar lines as Grade 0 (none), Grade 1 (mild), Grade 2 (moderate) and Grade 3 (severe). A responder was defined as having a severity grade of 0 or 1 at a given visit, and a severity grade of 2 or 3 at baseline. Subjects with a baseline score of 0 or 1 were excluded from the analysis of responders. The proportion (percentage) of responders measured by ILA at all study visits per treatment cycle in in the OL period is presented.

  12. Mean SGA Score at All Other Study Visits (OL Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 5, Day 85.

    On each study visit per treatment cycle in the OL period, subjects were asked to assess the change, since the last treatment administration, in the appearance of their glabellar lines using the following 9-point Global Assessment Scale: +4 =100% improvement; +3 =75% improvement; +2 =50% improvement; +1 =25% improvement; 0 =no change; -1 =25% worsening; -2 =50%worsening; -3 =75% worsening; -4 =100% worsening.

    The mean SGA score for study visits on Day 8 to Day 85 in the OL period is presented.

  13. The Proportion of Responders With Respect to the SGA Score at All Other Study Visits (OL Period).

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 5, Day 85.

    On each study visit per treatment cycle in the OL period, subjects were asked to assess the change, since the last treatment administration, in the appearance of their glabellar lines using the following 9-point Global Assessment Scale: +4 =100% improvement; +3 =75% improvement; +2 =50% improvement; +1 =25% improvement; 0 =no change; -1 =25% worsening; -2 =50%worsening; -3 =75% worsening; -4 =100% worsening.

    A responder, based on the SGA scale, was defined as having a grade of at least +2 (50% improvement). The proportion (percentage) of responders at each study visit on Day 8 to Day 85 in the OL period is presented.

  14. Mean Change From Baseline in Subject's Self-Perception of Age at All Study Visits (OL Period)

    Time frame: Up to Cycle 5, Day 29.

    At cycle baseline (Day 1 of each treatment cycle) and Day 29 of each cycle in the OL period, subjects were asked to evaluate their age over the past 7 days at the time of assessment, using the following categories:

    • I look like my current age;
    • I look _ years younger;
    • I look _ years older.

    The mean change from cycle baseline in subject's self-perception of age at Day 29 of each cycle of the OL Period was calculated. A negative mean change from baseline in the subject's self-perception of age indicates that the subject's self-perception was to look younger compared with baseline.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Ipsen

Industry

Registry information

Official study title

A Phase III, Randomised, Double Blind and Open Label Phase, Multicentre, Active and Placebo Controlled Study to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of Dysport Including a Comparison to Botox in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines, and to Assess the Long Term Efficacy and Safety of Dysport Following Repeated Treatments in This Indication

Important dates

Study start
2015
Primary completion
2016
Study completion
2017
First posted
May 21, 2015
Registry last updated
Aug 6, 2019

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.