Efficacy and Safety of RelabotulinumtoxinA, a New Ready-to-Use Liquid Formulation Botulinum Toxin: Results From the READY-1 Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial in Glabellar Lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: RelabotulinumtoxinA (RelaBoNT-A, Galderma, Uppsala, Sweden) is an innovative, ready-to-use liquid botulinum toxin A, produced with PEARL (precipitation-free extraction and activity-preserving refined liquid) manufacturing technology, which yields a potent, complex-free formulation. OBJECTIVES: In the READY-1 study, efficacy and safety outcomes following a single RelaBoNT-A treatment for glabellar line correction were examined. METHODS: Adults with moderate to severe glabellar lines received RelaBoNT-A (50 U) or placebo in a 3:1 randomized, 6-month, phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study. Primary endpoints (examined at Month 1, maximum frown) comprised the composite ≥2-grade response, defined as ≥2-grades improvement from baseline on concurrent investigator (glabellar line investigator live assessment; GL-ILA) and participant (glabellar line subject live assessment; GL-SLA) severity scales (US endpoint), and the investigator-reported responder rate for participants scored as 0 (none) or 1 (mild) (GL-ILA scale only; EU endpoint). Participant satisfaction and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported. RESULTS: Overall, 297 adults were randomized and treated. Month 1 composite ≥2-grade responder rate was 82.9% (RelaBoNT-A, n = 199) vs 0% (placebo, n = 67; P < .001). Month 1 investigator-reported none or mild responder rate was 96.3% (RelaBoNT-A) vs 4.5% (placebo; P < .001). GL-ILA scores remained higher with RelaBoNT-A (23.6% [none or mild]; 58.1% [≥1-grade improvement]) vs placebo (1.5%; 10.4%, respectively) through Month 6 (P < .001). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, 75% still showed GL-ILA and GL-SLA improvements from baseline at 169 days (end of study). Participants reported onset of effect from Day 1 (39%) and satisfaction with natural-looking results (96.8%; Month 1). RelaBoNT-A-related TEAEs were low (3.6%) and typically mild. CONCLUSIONS: A single RelaBoNT-A treatment was effective and demonstrated a favorable safety profile. RelaBoNT-A provided significant improvements in glabellar line severity, high satisfaction, rapid onset, and enduring effectiveness throughout the 6-month study period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".