The purpose of this research study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of injection with DGE Injectable Gel (hyaluronic acid with lidocaine manufactured by Genzyme Biosurgery) as compared to injection with Restylane (a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved dermal filler) in patients undergoing cutaneous correction of the nasolabial folds (NLFs).
This study included an Initial and a Repeat Treatment period. The Initial Treatment period was a subject and evaluator-blinded, randomized split face study in which subjects received DGE in one nasolabial fold and Restylane in the other nasolabial fold. Both safety and efficacy were evaluated. In the Repeat Treatment Period, participants received DGE in both NLFs. Safety was evaluated.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
140
Dermal Gel Extra (DGE) Injectable Gel contains hyaluronic acid with lidocaine. DGE was administered to nasolabial folds via the intradermal route. The Principal Investigator was instructed to inject a sufficient amount of DGE to ensure full correction of the NLF wrinkles (i.e., to the optimal level of correction achievable). Up to 2 touch-up treatments were allowed in the Initial Treatment period.
Restylane was administered to nasolabial folds via the intradermal route. The Principal Investigator was instructed to inject a sufficient amount of Restylane to ensure full correction of the NLF wrinkles (i.e., to the optimal level of correction achievable). Up to 2 touch-up treatments were allowed in the Initial Treatment period.
Unnamed facility
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Unnamed facility
La Jolla, California, United States
Unnamed facility
Miami Beach, Florida, United States
Unnamed facility
Westwood, New Jersey, United States
Change From Baseline in the Blinded Evaluator's Assessment of Nasolabial Fold (NLF) Wrinkle Severity at Week 24
This was a comparison of the mean change between Baseline and the Week 24 score (baseline minus week 24 scores) in the blinded evaluators' assessments of NLF wrinkle severity. A positive value for the mean change indicates an improvement. Genzyme 6-Point Grading Scale (GGS) for NLF was used for the assessment. A GGS score of zero indicates no wrinkles and a score of 5 indicates very deep wrinkles with redundant folds.
Time frame: Week 24
Participant's Pain Assessment During the Initial Treatment Measured on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
The pain experienced by each participant at the time of injection (time 0) and at 15 and 30 minutes after injection during the initial treatment visit was evaluated. Pain was measured using a VAS of 0 mm (no pain) to 100 mm (extreme pain).
Time frame: Day 1
Change From Baseline in the Blinded Evaluator's Assessment of Nasolabial Folds (NLF) Wrinkle Severity at Week 36
Mean change between Baseline and the Week 36 score (Baseline minus week 36 scores) in the blinded evaluators' assessments of NLF wrinkle severity. A positive value for the mean change indicates an improvement. Genzyme 6-Point Grading Scale (GGS) for NLF was used for the assessment. A GGS score of zero indicates no wrinkles and a score of 5 indicates very deep wrinkles with redundant folds.
Time frame: Week 36
Number of Participants With at Least a 1 Point Improvement From Baseline in the Blinded Evaluator's Assessment of Wrinkle Severity at Week 24
Count of participants with at least a 1-point improvement from Baseline in the Genzyme 6-Point Grading Scale (GGS) at Week 24. A GGS score of zero indicates no wrinkles and a score of 5 indicates very deep wrinkles with redundant folds.
Time frame: Week 24
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
EMLA Cream (Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetics) is an FDA-approved topical anesthetic comprised of 2.5% each of lidocaine/prilocaine. EMLA Cream was applied in approximately equal amounts prior to all injections of DGE and Restylane.
Unnamed facility
White Plains, New York, United States
Unnamed facility
Nashville, Tennessee, United States
Participant Product Preference at Week 24
Participants indicated their product preference at Week 24 after Date of Optimal Correction (DOC).
Time frame: Week 24
Participant Product Preference at Week 36
Participants indicated their product preference at Week 36 after Date of Optimal Correction (DOC).
Time frame: Week 36
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events During the Initial Treatment Period
Counts of participants with treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) from the time of injection up to Week 36. AEs are presented regardless of relationship to study device and/or procedure. If a participant had more than one occurrence of the same AE, he/she was counted only once. The most severe occurrence of an AE, as well as the most extreme relationship of the AE to the device, was indicated in cases of multiple occurrences of the same AE. For AEs by relationship, procedure-related and device-related AEs are not mutually exclusive and therefore are not additive.
Time frame: Weeks 1-36
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events During the Repeat Treatment Period
Count of participants with treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) from the time of injection for the repeat treatment period up to week 47. AEs are presented regardless of relationship to study device and/or procedure. If a participant had more than one occurrence of the same AE, he/she was counted only once. The most severe occurrence of an AE, as well as most extreme relationship of the AE to the device, was indicated in cases of multiple occurrences of the same AE. For AEs by relationship, procedure-related and device-related AEs are not mutually exclusive and therefore are not additive.
Time frame: weeks 36 up to 47 weeks