Clinical comparison between two hyaluronic acid-derived fillers in the treatment of nasolabial folds in Chinese subjects: BioHyalux versus Restylane.

Abstract

Hyaluronic acid fillers are used to improve the appearance of nasolabial folds (NLF). This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and durability of a new hyaluronic acid gel (BioHyalux) versus Restylane for the correction of NLF. This was a multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial involving 88 subjects with moderate to severe NLF. Subjects were randomized to BioHyalux and Restylane on either sides of the NLF. NLF was assessed before and right after injection, and at 1week, 1, 3, and 6months. Patients were followed up for 13-15months to evaluate the durability and long-term safety. A clinically meaningful response was predefined as at least one-point improvement on the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale, which is a five-point scale. At 6months, the response rate of BioHyalux was not inferior to that of Restylane (P<0.05). At the 13-15months follow-up, the response rate by investigators was 58.0% on the BioHyalux side versus 63.8% on the Restylane side. The response rate by subjects showed similar results, which was 56.5% on the BioHyalux side versus 60.9% on the Restylane side at 13-15months. The subjects' Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) showed that most subjects felt improvements on both sides of NLF (P>0.05) at all time points. At 6months, 100% reported improvements on both side; at 13-15months, 60% of subjects reported improvements with BioHyalux versus 64% with Restylane. Adverse events were transient and predominantly mild or moderate in severity including injection site swelling, pain, itching, bruising, and tenderness. BioHyalux had reliable safety and tolerance, and could be an effective injectable filler for correcting NLF.