MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399963709 · doi:10.1093/asj/sjae131

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

2024· article· en· W4399963709 on OpenAlexaff
Sachin M. Shridharani, Amir Moradi, Lisa Donofrio, Michael H. Gold, Brian S. Biesman, Melissa Chiang, Rosalyn George, Kristel D. Polder, Nowell Solish, Schwarcz, Xiao-Ming Lin, Eva Axén, Inna Prygova

Bibliographic record

VenueAesthetic Surgery Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersGalderma
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboAdverse effectClinical endpointBotulinum toxinRandomized controlled trialDouble blindInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAesthetic Surgery JournalSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207