Susan H Weinkle1, W Philip Werschler2, Craig F Teller3, Jonathan M Sykes4, Ava Shamban5, Alexander Rivkin6, Vic A Narurkar7, Michael S Kaminer8, Steven Dayan9, Joel L Cohen10,11, Conor J Gallagher12. 1. Affiliate Clinical Professor of Dermatology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL. 2. Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine/Dermatology, University of Washington, School of Medicine, Seattle, WA. 3. dermatologist in private practice in Bellaire, TX. 4. Professor and Director of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, UC Davis Medical Group, Sacramento, CA. 5. dermatologist in private practice in Santa Monica, CA. 6. Assistant Clinical Professor at the David Geffen/UCLA School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 7. dermatologist in private practice in San Francisco, CA. 8. dermatologist in private practice in Chestnut Hill, MA. 9. facial plastic surgeon in private practice in Chicago, IL. 10. Associate Clinical Professor, Department of Dermatology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. 11. Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Dermatology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA. 12. Senior Medical Director of Facial Aesthetics at Allergan plc, Irvine, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals seeking aesthetic treatment have concerns regarding multiple facial areas. OBJECTIVES: Assess the aesthetic impact and satisfaction achieved with a multimodal approach to aesthetic treatment using a combination of minimally invasive treatments. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, rater-blinded, 4-month HARMONY study evaluated patient satisfaction and aesthetic impact of a combination of fillers (VYC-20L, HYC-24L, and HYC-24L+), onabotulinumtoxinA, and bimatoprost. Males and females aged 35 to 65 years received on-label, staged treatment with fillers, as needed per investigator assessment, on day 1, with touch ups allowed on day 14. Bimatoprost was self-administered once daily for 17 weeks. OnabotulinumtoxinA was injected into glabellar lines, crow's feet lines, or both at month 3. Primary effectiveness measure was mean change from baseline on the FACE-Q 10-item Satisfaction with Facial Appearance Overall Scale. RESULTS: Of 100 patients treated, 93 underwent at least the 4-month posttreatment assessment and were assessed for efficacy. The FACE-Q Satisfaction with Facial Appearance Overall Scale total score increased from baseline (41.2) to month 4 (72.9; P < 0.00001; effect size, 2.7). Improvement following multimodal treatment was observed on FACE-Q individual items. Self-perceived age decreased from 0.2 years older than actual age at baseline to 4.6 years younger at month 4. Nearly all patients (99%) rated themselves as improved or much improved on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. Investigator assessments also demonstrated improvement. Mild to moderate adverse events occurred in 42 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive, multimodal treatment resulted in improvements in FACE-Q scores and perceived age, indicating a high degree of patient satisfaction and a younger facial appearance.
BACKGROUND: Individuals seeking aesthetic treatment have concerns regarding multiple facial areas. OBJECTIVES: Assess the aesthetic impact and satisfaction achieved with a multimodal approach to aesthetic treatment using a combination of minimally invasive treatments. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, rater-blinded, 4-month HARMONY study evaluated patient satisfaction and aesthetic impact of a combination of fillers (VYC-20L, HYC-24L, and HYC-24L+), onabotulinumtoxinA, and bimatoprost. Males and females aged 35 to 65 years received on-label, staged treatment with fillers, as needed per investigator assessment, on day 1, with touch ups allowed on day 14. Bimatoprost was self-administered once daily for 17 weeks. OnabotulinumtoxinA was injected into glabellar lines, crow's feet lines, or both at month 3. Primary effectiveness measure was mean change from baseline on the FACE-Q 10-item Satisfaction with Facial Appearance Overall Scale. RESULTS: Of 100 patients treated, 93 underwent at least the 4-month posttreatment assessment and were assessed for efficacy. The FACE-Q Satisfaction with Facial Appearance Overall Scale total score increased from baseline (41.2) to month 4 (72.9; P < 0.00001; effect size, 2.7). Improvement following multimodal treatment was observed on FACE-Q individual items. Self-perceived age decreased from 0.2 years older than actual age at baseline to 4.6 years younger at month 4. Nearly all patients (99%) rated themselves as improved or much improved on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. Investigator assessments also demonstrated improvement. Mild to moderate adverse events occurred in 42 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive, multimodal treatment resulted in improvements in FACE-Q scores and perceived age, indicating a high degree of patient satisfaction and a younger facial appearance.
Authors: Maarten J Ottenhof; Inge J Veldhuizen; Lusanne J V Hensbergen; Louise L Blankensteijn; Wichor Bramer; Berend Vd Lei; Maarten M Hoogbergen; René R W J Hulst; Chris J Sidey-Gibbons Journal: Aesthetic Plast Surg Date: 2022-06-28 Impact factor: 2.326
Authors: Cristiana Oliveira; Cristina Coelho; José A Teixeira; Pedro Ferreira-Santos; Claudia M Botelho Journal: Molecules Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 4.411
Authors: Steven Dayan; John Joseph; Amir Moradi; Z Paul Lorenc; Kyle Coleman; Glynis Ablon; Joely Kaufman-Janette; Sue Ellen Cox; Andrew Campbell; Girish Munavalli; Inna Prygova Journal: J Cosmet Dermatol Date: 2022-04-12 Impact factor: 2.189
Authors: Joel Schlessinger; Joel L Cohen; Ava Shamban; Carolyn Jacob; Kian Karimi; Corey Maas; Vanessa Lane; Sarah Coquis-Knezek; Matthew Meckfessel Journal: Dermatol Surg Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 2.914
Authors: Joel L Cohen; Alexander Rivkin; Steven Dayan; Ava Shamban; W Philip Werschler; Craig F Teller; Michael S Kaminer; Jonathan M Sykes; Susan H Weinkle; Julie K Garcia Journal: Aesthet Surg J Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 4.283