Subjects Desiring Lip Augmentation
Conditions
Brief summary
Primary objective: \- To evaluate the sensitivity of the Merz Lip Fullness Assessment Scale (MLFAS). Secondary objectives: * To evaluate the clinical aesthetic improvement outcome in lips appearance four weeks after Etermis 4® injection. * To evaluate safety/tolerability of Etermis 4® treatment in lips.
Interventions
DEVICEEtermis 4®
Etermis 4® is a sterile non-pyrogenic physiological gel made of reticulated hyaluronic acid (HA) of non-animal origin.
Sponsors
Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Healthy male or female study subjects with thin to medium lips volume (grade 1 to 2 on MLFAS), seeking for hyaluronic acid (HA) for lips volume augmentation in ≥1-point improvement on the MLFAS on both the upper and lower lips and fulfilling the criteria listed in the Instruction for Use (IFU) of the Study Medical Device to be injected.
Exclusion criteria
* Subjects with a medical condition and/or medication according to current IFU which is contra indicated for HA filler treatment, or prior facial surgeries or surgical permanent implants, lips augmentation treatment or other aesthetic procedure in the face that could interfere with performance assessment.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Responder rate for treated and for untreated lips at Visit 2 (Week 4), as assessed live by the blinded rater using the Merz Lip Fullness Assessment Scale (MLFAS). | Week 4 | Response is defined as ≥ 1-point improvement on both the upper and lower lips compared to baseline. Upper and lower lips are to be assessed separately. The MLFAS is a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (very thin) to 4 (very full). A positive number change from baseline indicates improvement. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change from baseline for treated and untreated lips at Visit 2 (Week 4) as assessed live by the blinded rater using MLFAS | Week 4 | Upper and lower lips are to be assessed separately. The MLFAS is a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (very thin) to 4 (very full). A positive number change from baseline indicates improvement. |
| Agreement rate in treated subjects between MLFAS responders and Investigator Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (Investigator-GAIS) responders at Visit 2 (Week 4). | Week 4 | Agreement for a subject is reached if he/she is a responder for both MLFAS and Investigator-GAIS or he/she is a non-responder for both MLFAS and Investigator-GAIS. GAIS response is defined as at least a +1 improved rating on the Investigator -GAIS. The MLFAS is a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (very thin) to 4 (very full). A positive number change from baseline indicates improvement. The Investigator-GAIS is a 7-point scale ranging from -3 (very much worse) to +4 (very much improved). |
| Agreement rate in treated subjects between MLFAS responders and FACE-Q Satisfaction with Lips responders at Visit 2 (week 4). | Week 4 | Agreement for a subject is reached if he/she is a responder for both MLFAS and FACE-Q Satisfaction with Lips or he/she is a non-responder for both MLFAS and FACE-Q Satisfaction with Lips. MLFAS is assessed by a blinded rater. MLFAS response is defined as ≥ 1-point improvement on both the upper and lower lips compared to baseline. FACE-Q Satisfaction with Lips is assessed by the treated subject at baseline and at Visit 2. FACE-Q Satisfaction with Lips response is defined as a positive change in the FACE-Q score. The MLFAS is a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (very thin) to 4 (very full). A positive number change from baseline indicates improvement. FACE-Q scores are derived from a questionaire of 10 questions relating to the satisfaction with lips appearance. Answers range from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 4 (very satisfied). |
Countries
Germany
Outcome results
None listed