A Multicenter, Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study to Examine the Safety and Effectiveness of Hyaluronic Acid Filler in the Correction of Infraorbital Hollows.

BACKGROUND: Hyaluronic acid injections are increasingly used for correction of infraorbital hollows (IOHs). OBJECTIVES: Examination of effectiveness (IOH correction) and safety of Restylane® EyelightTM hyaluronic acid (HAEYE, Galderma, Uppsala, Sweden) injections. METHODS: Subjects with moderate/severe IOHs, assessed using the Galderma infraorbital hollows scale (GIHS), were randomized to HAEYE injections (via needle/cannula) (Day 1+optional Month-1 touch up) or no-treatment control. Primary endpoint was blinded evaluator-reported Month-3 response, defined as ≥1-point GIHS improvement from baseline (both sides, concurrently). Other endpoints examined investigator-reported aesthetic improvement (GAIS), subject-reported satisfaction (FACE-Q™ satisfaction with outcome; satisfaction questionnaire), and adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 333 subjects were randomized. Month 3 GIHS responder rate was significantly higher with HA-EYE (87.4%) versus control (17.7%; p<0.001), and comparable between HA-EYE-needle and HA-EYE-cannula groups (p=0.967). HAEYE GAIS responder rate was 87.5-97.7% (Months 3-12). Mean FACE-Q Rasch-transformed scores were 64.3-73.5 (HAEYE) versus 14.1-16.2 (control) through Month 12. Subjects reported looking younger (≥71%) and less tired (≥79%) with reduced under-eye shadows (≥76%) and recovered within 3-5 hours, post-treatment. Efficacy was maintained through Month 12 (63.5% GIHS responders) and through Month 18, after Month-12 retreatment (80.3% GIHS responders; 99.4% GAIS responders; FACE-Q scores: 72.5-72.8). Forty subjects (12.7%) reported typically mild adverse events (4.9% HAEYE-needle; 20.9% HAEYE-cannula). CONCLUSION: HAEYE treatment was effective in correcting moderate/severe IOHs at the primary endpoint (Month 3). Efficacy was sustained through Month 12 after first treatment for 63.5% and through Month 18 for 80.3% (after one retreatment) with needle or cannula administration. Safety outcomes were reassuring.

Restoring long-lasting midface volume in the Asian face with a hyaluronic acid filler: A randomized controlled multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Hyaluronic acid (HA) filler treatment is a minimally-invasive alternative to surgery to volumize the cheeks. HAVOL (Restylane® Volyme) is a flexible HA filler suited to contouring and volumizing the midface. METHODS: This randomized, evaluator-blinded, no-treatment controlled study evaluated effectiveness and safety of HAVOL for correction of midface volume deficit and midface contour deficiency in Chinese subjects. In total 111 subjects were randomized to HAVOL and 37 to no treatment (control). The primary endpoint was response, on the blinded evaluator-assessed Medicis Midface Volume Scale (MMVS), at 6 months after last injection for the treatment group and 6 months after randomization for controls, where response was defined as ≥1-point improvement from baseline on both sides of the face. RESULTS: HAVOL was superior to no treatment at 6 months, meeting the primary objective: 76% versus 8% MMVS responders, a difference of 68% (CI: 55.7%-79.4%, p < 0.0001). These effects were sustained in 51% at 12 months after last injection. A majority (≥96%) had improved aesthetic appearance of midface fullness at Month 1 (using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale [GAIS]), effects which remained in ≥80% up to 12 months. Volume change captured by 3D photography increased after 1 month to 3.6 mL (close to the total injected volume of 3.4 mL), and remained stable through 12 months. Over 97% reported satisfaction with results after treatment with HAVOL. Additionally, HAVOL was well tolerated, with no unanticipated related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that HAVOL is effective and well tolerated for midface treatment in a Chinese population.

A Randomized, Controlled, Evaluator-Blinded, Multi-Center Study of Hyaluronic Acid Filler Effectiveness and Safety in Lip Fullness Augmentation.

BACKGROUND: HARK was recently approved in the US for lip augmentation and correction of upper perioral rhytids. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate noninferiority of HARK versus a control (HAJV) in lip fullness augmentation at Week 8 after last injection (blinded evaluation). Secondary objectives were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of HARK in lip fullness augmentation and correction of upper perioral rhytids. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment with HARK or control (randomized 2:1) was administered on Day 1 in this 48-week, evaluator-blinded study with optional touch-up at Week 4. Primary endpoint was change from baseline to Week 8 in lip fullness. Secondary endpoints included lip fullness, wrinkle severity, aesthetic improvement, subject satisfaction, adverse events, and local tolerability (subject diary entries). RESULTS: The primary objective was met; HARK was noninferior to control in lip fullness augmentation at Week 8. Lip fullness and wrinkle severity improvement persisted at Week 48, and was accompanied by high aesthetic improvement and subject satisfaction scores. The mean volume of HARK injected was approximately 20% lower than control. Treatment-related adverse events and local tolerability symptoms were predominantly mild and transient. CONCLUSION: HARK was noninferior to control in lip fullness augmentation at Week 8, well-tolerated, and effective throughout this 48-week study.