Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04124692

Safety and Effectiveness of Sculptra Aesthetic for Correction of Cheek Wrinkles

The study has been designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Sculptra Aesthetic as a single regimen for correction of cheek wrinkles after changes in reconstitution and injection procedures compared to the approved label.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Age range

21 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Galderma Research Site, Scottsdale, Arizona, United States

Loading trial locations.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Intent to undergo correction of cheek wrinkles on both sides of the face and a Galderma Cheek Wrinkles Scale (GCWS) At Rest score of Moderate or Severe on EACH side of the face.

Exclusion criteria

  • Known/previous allergy or hypersensitivity to any of the Sculptra Aesthetic constituents.
  • Previous tissue augmenting therapy, contouring or revitalization treatment in the face, except the lips, with any of the following fillers prior to Baseline visit:
  • Collagen, Hyaluronic Acid - 12 months
  • Calcium Hydroxyapatite (CaHa), Poly L- Lactic Acid (PLLA) or permanent (nonbiodegradable)- Prohibited

Treatment and study plan

Sculptra Aesthetic new dilution

Device

Treatment of cheek wrinkles

Primary outcomes

  1. Responder Rate Based on the Blinded Evaluator's Live Assessment of the Galderma Cheek Wrinkles Scale (GCWS) at Rest at Month 12

    Time frame: At Month 12

    Responder rate was defined as the percentage of participants with at least a 1-grade improvement from baseline on the GCWS, on both sides of the face, concurrently. GCWS is a validated 5-point scale used to assess the severity of cheek wrinkles: 0 (none [no lines or wrinkles]), 1 (mild [only few superficial lines]), 2 (moderate [many superficial lines or a few shallow wrinkles]), 3 (severe [many shallow wrinkles or a few moderate depth wrinkles]) and 4 (very severe [many moderate wrinkles or at least one depth wrinkle with or without redundant folds]). Higher score means more severe (worse) wrinkles. The participant was to have a relaxed face during the assessment.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Responder Rate Based on the Blinded Evaluator's Live Assessment of the GCWS at Rest at Months 7 and 9

    Time frame: At Months 7 and 9

    Responder rate was defined as the percentage of participants with at least a 1-grade improvement from baseline on the GCWS, on both sides of the face, concurrently. GCWS is a validated 5-point scale used to assess the severity of cheek wrinkles: 0 (none [no lines or wrinkles]), 1 (mild [only few superficial lines]), 2 (moderate [many superficial lines or a few shallow wrinkles]), 3 (severe [many shallow wrinkles or a few moderate depth wrinkles]) and 4 (very severe [many moderate wrinkles or at least one depth wrinkle with or without redundant folds]). Higher score means more severe (worse) wrinkles. The participant was to have a relaxed face during the assessment.

  2. Responder Rate Based on the Blinded Evaluator's Live Assessment of the GCWS Dynamic at Months 7, 9 and 12

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    Responder rate was defined as the percentage of participants with at least a 1-grade improvement from baseline on the GCWS, on both sides of the face, concurrently. GCWS is a validated 5-point scale used to assess the severity of cheek wrinkles: 0 (none [no lines or wrinkles]), 1 (mild [only few superficial lines]), 2 (moderate [many superficial lines or a few shallow wrinkles]), 3 (severe [many shallow wrinkles or a few moderate depth wrinkles]) and 4 (very severe [many moderate wrinkles or at least one depth wrinkle with or without redundant folds]). Higher score means more severe (worse) wrinkles. The participant was to have a closed maximum smile during the assessment.

  3. Percentage of Participants With Improvement Rate Based on the Independent Photographic Reviewer's Assessment

    Time frame: At Month 12

    Improvement rate based on the Independent Photographic Reviewer's assessment using random pairings of baseline and Month 12 photographs was done.

    An improved subject is defined as a subject for whom the Independent Photographic Reviewer identified the month 12 photograph in the pair as post-treatment.

  4. Percentage of Participants With At Least "Improved" on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) Based on the Participants Live Assessment

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    GAIS responder rates are based on independent assessments by the participant. Responder rate was defined as the percentage of participants with at least "Improved" when compared to baseline before first treatment. The 7-graded GAIS was used by the participant to live assess the aesthetic improvement of the cheek wrinkles by responding to the question: "How would you describe the aesthetic improvement today compared to the photograph taken before treatment?" by using the respective categorical scale as follows; Very Much Improved, Much Improved, Improved, No Change, Worse, Much Worse, Very Much Worse.

  5. Percentage of Participants With At Least "Improved" on the GAIS Based on the Investigator Live Assessment

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    GAIS responder rates are based on independent assessments by the investigator. Responder rate was defined as the percentage of participants with at least "Improved" when compared to baseline before first treatment. The 7-graded GAIS was used by the investigator to live assess the aesthetic improvement of the cheek wrinkles by responding to the question: "How would you describe the aesthetic improvement today compared to the photograph taken before treatment?" by using the respective categorical scale as follows; Very Much Improved, Much Improved, Improved, No Change, Worse, Much Worse, Very Much Worse.

  6. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Make You Look Younger?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  7. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Make You Feel Better About Yourself?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  8. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Improve Your Self-confidence?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  9. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Improve Overall Satisfaction With Your Appearance?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  10. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Make You Look/Feel More Confident in Your Life?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  11. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Make You Look the Way You Feel?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  12. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Improve Your Skin Firmness?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  13. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Improve Your Skin Radiance?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  14. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Improve Your Skin Sagging?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  15. Satisfaction With Treatment: Does the Treatment Make Your Skin Look More Refreshed?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Excellent, Very good, Good, Satisfactory, Not satisfied.

  16. Subject Satisfaction: Would You Say That the Treatment Results Are Natural Looking?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree or Disagree, Disagree, Strongly disagree.

  17. Subject Satisfaction: Would You Say the Subtle Changes Over Time Was Worth It?

    Time frame: At Months 7, 9, and 12

    A 5-point subject satisfaction questionnaire with the following responses: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree or Disagree, Disagree, Strongly disagree.

  18. Subject Satisfaction: Would You Recommend the Treatment to a Friend?

    Time frame: At Month 12

    A subject satisfaction question with responses Yes or No.

  19. Subject Satisfaction: Would You do the Treatment Again?

    Time frame: At Month 12

    A subject satisfaction question with responses Yes or No.

  20. Change From Baseline in Satisfaction With Cheeks FACE-Q™ Questionnaire Rasch-transformed Total Scores

    Time frame: Treatment group: Baseline, Months 1, 2, 3, 7, 9 and 12; Control group: Baseline, Months 7, 9 and 12

    The participant assessed satisfaction using the 5 questions on the FACE-Q: Satisfaction with Cheeks Appearance questionnaire measured on a 4-point scale where 1=very dissatisfied, 2=somewhat dissatisfied, 3=somewhat satisfied, and 4=very satisfied. The responses to the items were converted to a 100-point Rasch transformed total score with 0 (worst) to 100 (best). Higher scores indicate higher satisfaction. A negative change from baseline indicates less improvement.

  21. Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious TEAEs

    Time frame: From start of study drug administration up to end of the study (up to Month 12)

    An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs with a start date on or after the first dose of investigational product or a start date before the date of the first dose of investigational product that increased in severity or after the date of the first dose. A SAE was any untoward medical occurrence (whether considered to be related to investigational product or not) that at any dose: resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital abnormality/birth defect, and was an important medical event. TEAEs included both serious and non-serious TEAEs.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Galderma R&D

Industry

Registry information

Official study title

A Randomized, Evaluator-blinded, No-treatment Controlled, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of Sculptra Aesthetic for Correction of Cheek Wrinkles.

Important dates

Study start
2019
Primary completion
2021
Study completion
2021
First posted
Oct 11, 2019
Registry last updated
Nov 18, 2023

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.

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