Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Botulinum Toxin

Examining Duration of Effect in Facial Aesthetic Applications

  • Review Article
  • Botulinum Toxin: Duration of Effect
  • Published:
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Patient satisfaction with botulinum toxin treatment is a key success factor in aesthetic procedures and is governed by the interaction of numerous variables. Duration of effect is important because it influences retreatment intervals as well as affecting cost and convenience to the patient. In order to review the evidence on the duration of benefit associated with various commercial formulations of botulinum toxin, MEDLINE was searched using the following terms: ‘botulinum’ and ‘duration’/‘retreatment’ (limits: ‘clinical trials,’ ‘meta-analyses,’ ‘English’). I also searched my existing reference files, reference lists of identified articles, and meeting/conference abstracts to ensure completeness. The focus was on clinical medicine and aesthetic trials. To be eligible for the analysis, studies had to include efficacy assessments at multiple timepoints. To estimate duration of benefit, the following outcomes were examined and summarized: responder rates, mean wrinkle severity scores at various timepoints (with or without changes from baseline), and relapse rates. Duration at both repose and maximum attempted muscle contraction was considered when provided. Where possible, duration was assessed by formulation and dose.

The initial search yielded 164 articles. Of these, 35 included an adequate measure of duration in aesthetic indications. The majority of these (22) were on the glabellar area. Study designs and endpoints were highly heterogeneous, and duration of effect varied between studies. Several studies with the BOTOX® Cosmetic (onabotulinumtoxinA; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, USA) formulation of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) included relapse rates, defined conservatively as return to baseline levels of line severity for two consecutive visits approximately 30 days apart (at repose and maximum contraction). In these studies, duration of effect ranged from 3 to 5 months in female patients and from 4 to 6 months in male patients. Individual patients had longer durations of response. Across all studies providing relapse rates, most patients relapsed by 6 months. In studies assessing patient satisfaction, satisfaction remained high throughout the duration of the studies (∼4 months). With the Dysport® formulation (abobotulinumtoxinA, clostridium botulinum type A toxin-hemagglutinin complex; Ipsen Biopharm Ltd, Wrexham, England), retreatment intervals were estimated at a mean of 3.9 months (median = 3.3 months). These results were consistent with responder rates from another Dysport® study in which the active treatment differed from placebo at 3 but not 4 months. A single comparative study demonstrated that the proportion of patients relapsing at week 16 was 23% (95% CI 11.5, 41.6) in the BOTOX® Cosmetic group as compared with 40% (95% CI 25.2, 60.1) in the Dysport® group. Myobloc® (rimabotulinumtoxinB, botulinum toxin type B; Solstice Neurosciences, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA) was associated with shorter durations of action (2–3 months). Data from facial areas other than the glabella, although more limited, supported a duration of at least 3–4 months. The addition of BoNTA to dermal fillers or light/laser therapy appeared to increase the degree of effect. Repeated BoNTA treatments may prolong duration of effect or potentiate the effect.

In conclusion, patients can expect treatments to last ≥3 months but often as many as 4–5 months depending on the facial area, dose, and formulation. Additional research should help clarify the impact of age, baseline rhytid severity, patient sex, repeated treatments, and combination treatment on longevity of effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Table II
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Cosmetic surgery national data bank: 2007 statistics [online]. Available from URL: /http://www.surgery.org/download/2007stats.pdf [Accessed 2008 Apr 9]

  2. MacPherson S. Self-esteem and cosmetic enhancement. Plast Surg Nurs 2005; 25 (1): 5–20

    Google Scholar 

  3. Finn JC, Cox SE, Earl ML. Social implications of hyperfunctional facial lines. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 450–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cox SE, Finn JC. Social implications of hyperdynamic facial lines and patient satisfaction outcomes. Int Ophthalmol Clin 2005; 45 (3): 13–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Aoki KR, Ranoux D, Wissel J. Using translational medicine to understand clinical differences between botulinum toxin formulations. Eur J Neurol 2006; 13 Suppl. 4: 10–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. De Boulle KLV. Botulinum neurotoxin type A in facial aesthetics. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2007; 8 (8): 1059–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Botox® cosmetic [package insert]. Irvine (CA): Allergan, Inc., 2005

  8. Dysport® Clostridium botulinum type A toxin-haemagglutinin complex: summary of product characteristics [online]. Available from URL: /http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/displaydoc.asp?documentid=870 [Accessed 2007 Apr 13]

  9. Aoki KR, Guyer B. Botulinum toxin type A and other botulinum toxin serotypes: a comparative review of biochemical and pharmacological actions. Eur J Neurol 2001; 8 Suppl. 5: 21–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Aoki KR. Future aspects of botulinum neurotoxins. J Neural Transm 2008; 115 (4): 567–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Aoki KR, Satorius A, Ardila C, et al. Pharmacology of BOTOX®, Dysport®, Myobloc® and BTX-A in animal models of efficacy and safety [abstract]. International Conference on Basic and Therapeutic Aspects of Botulinum and Tetanus Toxins; 2005 Jun 23-25; Denver (CO)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dolly JO, Aoki KR. The structure and mode of action of different botulinum toxins. Eur J Neurol 2006; 13 Suppl. 4: 1–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eleopra R, Tugnoli V, Quatrale R, et al. Different types of botulinum toxin in humans. Mov Disord 2004; 19 Suppl. 8: S53–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosales RL, Bigalke H, Dressler D. Pharmacology of botulinum toxin: differences between type A preparations. Eur J Neurol 2006; 13 Suppl. 1: 2–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Setler P. The biochemistry of botulinum toxin type B. Neurology 2000; 55 (12 Suppl. 5): S22–8

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gordon MF, Barron R. Effectiveness of repeated treatment with botulinum toxin type A across different conditions. South Med J 2006; 99 (8): 853–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Carruthers JDA, Carruthers JA. Treatment of glabellar frown lines with C. botulinum-A exotoxin. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1992; 18 (1): 17–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hankins CL, Strimling R, Rogers GS. Botulinum A toxin for glabellar wrinkles: dose and response. Dermatol Surg 1998; 24: 1181–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Carruthers A, Carruthers J, Lowe NJ, et al., for the BOTOX® Glabellar Lines I & II Study Groups. One-year, randomised, multicenter, two-period study of the safety and efficacy of repeated treatments with botulinum toxin type A in patients with glabellar lines. J Clin Res 2004; 7: 1–20

    Google Scholar 

  20. Carruthers A, Carruthers J, Said S. Dose-ranging study of botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of glabellar rhytids in females. Dermatol Surg 2005; 31 (4): 414–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Carruthers A, Carruthers J. Prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallelgroup, dose-ranging study of botulinum toxin type A in men with glabellar rhytids. Dermatol Surg 2005; 31 (10): 1297–303

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Stotland MA, Kowalski JW, Ray BB. Patient-reported benefit and satisfaction with botulinum toxin type A treatment of moderate to severe glabellar rhytides: results from a prospective open-label study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 120 (5): 1386–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Carruthers A, Carruthers J, Cohen J. Dilution volume of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of glabellar rhytides: does it matter? Dermatol Surg 2007; 33 (1 Spec. No.): S97–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lowe P, Patnaik R, Lowe N. Comparison of two formulations of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of glabellar lines: a double-blind, randomized study. J Am Acad Dermatol 2006; 55 (6): 975–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lowe NJ, Yamauchi PS, Lask GP, et al. Botulinum toxins types A and B for brow furrows: preliminary experiences with type B toxin dosing. J Cosmet Laser Ther 2002; 4 (1): 15–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ascher B, Zakine B, Kestemont P, et al. A multicenter, randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled study of efficacy and safety of 3 doses of botulinum toxin A in the treatment of glabellar lines. J Am Acad Dermatol 2004; 51 (2): 223–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ascher B, Zakine B, Kestemont P, et al. Botulinum toxin A in the treatment of glabellar lines: scheduling the next injection. Aesth Surg J 2005; 25: 365–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Monheit G, Carruthers A, Brandt F, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of glabellar lines: determination of optimal dose. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33 (1 Spec. No.): S51–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rzany B, Ascher B, Fratila A, et al., for the GLADYS Study Group. Efficacy and safety of 3- and 5-injection patterns (30 and 50U) of botulinum toxin A (Dysport) for the treatment of wrinkles in the glabella and the central forehead region. Arch Dermatol 2006; 142 (3): 320–6

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Alster TS, Lupton JR. Botulinum toxin type B for dynamic glabellar rhytides refractory to botulinum toxin type A. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 516–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sadick NS. Botulinum toxin type B for glabellar wrinkles: a prospective openlabel response study. Dermatol Surg 2002; 28 (9): 817–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sadick NS. Prospective open-label study of botulinum toxin type B (Myobloc®) at doses of 2,400 and 3,000 U for the treatment of glabellar wrinkles. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 501–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Carruthers A, Carruthers J, Flynn TC, et al. Dose-finding, safety, and tolerability study of botulinum toxin type B for the treatment of hyperfunctional glabellar lines. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33 (1 Spec. No.): S60–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Levy JL, Servant JJ, Jouve E. Botulinum toxin A: a 9-month clinical and 3D in vivo profilometric crow’s feet wrinkle formation study. J Cosmet Laser Ther 2004; 6 (1): 16–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lowe NJ, Ascher B, Heckmann M, et al., on behalf of the Botox Facial Aesthetics Study Team. Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-response study of the safety and efficacy of botulinum toxin type A in subjects with crow’s feet. Dermatol Surg 2005; 31 (3): 257–62

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Carruthers A, Bogle M, Carruthers JD, et al. A randomized, evaluator-blinded, two-center study of the safety and effect of volume on the diffusion and efficacy of botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of lateral orbital rhytides. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33 (5): 567–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Matarasso SL. Comparison of botulinum toxin types A and B: a bilateral and double-blind randomized evaluation in the treatment of canthal rhytides. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (1): 7–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Baumann L, Slezinger A, Vujevich J, et al. A double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study of the safety and efficacy of Myobloc® (botulinum toxin type B)-purified neurotoxin complex for the treatment of crow’s feet: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 508–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lew H, Yun YS, Lee SY, et al. Effect of botulinum toxin A on facial wrinkle lines in Koreans. Ophthalmologica 2002; 216 (1): 50–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Carruthers A, Carruthers J, Cohen J. A prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, dose-ranging study of botulinum toxin type A in female subjects with horizontal forehead rhytides. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 61–7

    Google Scholar 

  41. Levy JL, Pons F, Jouve E. Management of the ageing eyebrow and forehead: an objective dose-response study with botulinum toxin. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2006; 20 (6): 711–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Ahn KY, Park MY, Park DH, et al. Botulinum toxin A for the treatment of facial hyperkinetic wrinkle lines in Koreans. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105: 778–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Ramirez AL, Reeck J, Maas CS. Botulinum toxin type B (Myobloc®) in the management of hyperkinetic facial lines. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002; 126 (5): 459–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rzany B, Dill-Müller D, Grablowitz D, et al. Repeated botulinum toxin A injections for the treatment of lines in the upper face: a retrospective study of 4,103 treatments in 945 patients. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33 (1 Spec. No.): S18–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Ahn MS, Catten M, Maas CS. Temporal brow lift using botulinum toxin A. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112 (5 Suppl.): 98S–104S

    Google Scholar 

  46. Spósito MMM. New indications for botulinum toxin type A in treating facial wrinkles of the mouth and neck. Aesth Plast Surg 2002; 26 (2): 89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Beer K, Yohn M, Closter J. A double-blinded, placebo-controlled study of BOTOX® for the treatment of subjects with chin rhytids. J Drugs Dermatol 2005; 4 (4): 417–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Carruthers J, Carruthers A. A prospective, randomized, parallel group study analyzing the effect of BTX-A (BOTOX®) and nonanimal sourced hyaluronic acid (NASHA, Restylane®) in combination compared with NASHA (Restylane®) alone in severe glabellar rhytides in adult female subjects: treatment of severe glabellar rhytides with a hyaluronic acid derivative compared with the derivative and BTX-A. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (8): 802–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Carruthers J, Carruthers A. The effect of full-face broadband light treatments alone and in combination with bilateral crow’s feet botulinum toxin type A chemodenervation. Dermatol Surg 2004; 30 (3): 355–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Zimbler MS, Holds JB, Kokoska MS, et al. Effect of botulinum toxin pretreatment on laser resurfacing results: a prospective, randomized, blinded trial. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2001; 3 (3): 165–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Patel MP, Talmor M, Nolan WB. Botox and collagen for glabellar furrows: advantages of combination therapy. Ann Plast Surg 2004; 52 (5): 442–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Guyuron B, Huddleston SW. Aesthetic indications for botulinum toxin injection. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 93 (5): 913–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Cox SE, Finn JC, Stetler L, et al. Development of the Facial Lines Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire and initial results for botulinum toxin type A-treated patients. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 444–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Flynn TC, Clark RE. Botulinum toxin type B (Myobloc®) versus botulinum toxin type A (BOTOX®) frontalis study: rate of onset and radius of diffusion. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29 (5): 519–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Lowe NJ, Lask G, Yamauchi P, et al. Bilateral, double-blind, randomized comparison of 3 doses of botulinum toxin type A and placebo in patients with crow’s feet. J Am Acad Dermatol 2002; 47 (6): 834–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Simonetta Moreau M, Cauhepe C, Magues JP, et al. A double-blind, randomized, comparative study of Dysport® vs. BOTOX® in primary palmar hyperhidrosis. Br J Dermatol 2003; 149 (5): 1041–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Jost WH, Kohl A, Brinkmann S, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of a botulinum toxin type A free of complexing proteins (NT 201) compared with commercially available botulinum toxin type A (BOTOX) in healthy volunteers. J Neural Transm 2005; 112 (7): 905–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Nussgens Z, Roggenkamper P. Comparison of two botulinum-toxin preparations in the treatment of essential blepharospasm. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1997; 235 (4): 197–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Bihari K. Safety, effectiveness, and duration of effect of BOTOX® after switching from Dysport® for blepharospasm, cervical dystonia, and hemifacial spasm. Curr Med Res Opin 2005; 21 (3): 433–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Odergren T, Hjaltason H, Kaakkola S, et al. A double blind, randomised, parallel group study to investigate the dose equivalence of Dysport® and BOTOX® in the treatment of cervical dystonia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 64 (1): 6–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Sampaio C, Ferreira JJ, Simoes F, et al. DYSBOT: a single-blind, randomized parallel study to determine whether any differences can be detected in the efficacy and tolerability of two formulations of botulinum toxin type A– Dysport® and BOTOX®–assuming a ratio of 4:1. Mov Disord 1997; 12: 1013–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Ranoux D, Gury C, Fondarai J, et al. Respective potencies of BOTOX® and Dysport®: a double blind, randomised, crossover study in cervical dystonia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002; 72 (4): 459–62

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Chapman MA, Barron R, Tanis DC, et al. Comparison of botulinum neurotoxin preparations for the treatment of cervical dystonia. Clin Ther 2007; 29 (7): 1325–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Trindade de Almeida AR, Marques E, de Almeida J, et al. Pilot study comparing the diffusion of two formulations of botulinum toxin type A in patients with forehead hyperhidrosis. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33 (1 Spec. No.): S37–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Lowe PL, Patnaik R, Lowe NJ. A comparison of two botulinum type A toxin preparations for the treatment of glabellar lines: double-blind, randomized, pilot study. Dermatol Surg 2005; 31 (12): 1651–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Allergan, Inc. provided editorial assistance in the preparation of this review. Dr Flynn is a consultant to Allergan, Inc., Solstice Neurosciences, Merz Pharmaceuticals, and Revance; a research participant in studies with Canfield Scientific, Medicis, Genzyme, and Skin Medica; and holds common stock in Allergan, Inc.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cary Skin Center, Cary, North Carolina, USA

    Timothy Corcoran Flynn (Clinical Professor of Dermatology)

  2. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, PO Box 5129, Cary, North Carolina, 27519, USA

    Timothy Corcoran Flynn (Clinical Professor of Dermatology)

Authors
  1. Timothy Corcoran Flynn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy Corcoran Flynn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Flynn, T.C. Botulinum Toxin. Am J Clin Dermatol 11, 183–199 (2010). https://doi.org/10.2165/11530110-000000000-00000

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11530110-000000000-00000

Keywords

Search

Navigation