Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2012 Dec;14(6):296-303. doi: 10.3109/14764172.2012.738913. Epub 2012 Nov 15.

A randomised, double-blind comparison of 20 units of onabotulinumtoxinA with 30 units of incobotulinumtoxinA for glabellar lines.

Author information

  • 1hautok und hautok cosmetics, München, Germany.



Biological activity data indicate that the units of incobotulinumtoxinA are not equivalent to those of onabotulinumtoxinA.


This study compared 20 units of onabotulinumtoxinA with 30 units of incobotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of glabellar lines.


In this multicenter, randomised, double-blind study, subjects with moderate or severe glabellar lines received a single treatment with 20 units of onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 112), or 30 units of incobotulinumtoxinA (n = 112). The primary endpoint was the percentage of subjects with a reduction of ≥ 1 point on the Facial Wrinkle Scale at maximum contraction as rated by injectors on day 28 post injection. The same variable was evaluated on days 84, 98, and 112.


At the primary endpoint, 20 units of onabotulinumtoxinA was as effective as 30 units of incobotulinumtoxinA (96% vs. 95% responders, respectively; difference in proportion of responders = 0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.04, 0.07). At subsequent time points, a trend towards a higher percentage of responders was observed in the group treated with 20 units of onabotulinumtoxinA. Given that the 95% CI surpassed the upper equivalence margin at these time points, equivalence was not established.


These data support the non-interchangeability of units of onabotulinumtoxinA and incobotulinumtoxinA, and the absence of a fixed dose ratio in clinical practice.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Taylor & Francis
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk