Trial Outcomes & Findings for Simulines Non-Inferiority Pivotal Study (NCT NCT02736825)

NCT ID: NCT02736825

Last Updated: 2020-02-19

Results Overview

Participant response was defined as \>=20 mm\^2 reduction in 2D submental area from baseline. Submandibular and Submental quantitative measurements were calculated comparing participants using prototype 2 simulines versus standard transducers. The standard 2D photographic images were obtained. Utilizing the lateral profile view of pre-and 90-day post treatment photos of each participant, quantitative results were calculated by using 5 evenly spaced points on the neck. Area was calculated between each of the 5 points and then sum of the 5 calculations was the total area of the region of interest. The delta area between the pre-and post-treatment area of the chin and neck determined the amount of tissue lift in the area.

Recruitment status

TERMINATED

Study phase

NA

Target enrollment

262 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

Day 90

Results posted on

2020-02-19

Participant Flow

The study was conducted at 8 sites in the United States.

A total of 262 participants were screened, enrolled, and treated in the study. Of these, 240 participants completed the 180-days evaluation. The study was terminated at 180 days.

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Group A
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 percent \[%\]) at the 4.5 millimeter (mm) and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DeepSEE (DS) 4-4.5 at 0.9 joules (J) with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 thermal coagulation points (TCPs) per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Overall Study
STARTED
127
135
Overall Study
COMPLETED
117
123
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
10
12

Reasons for withdrawal

Reasons for withdrawal
Measure
Group A
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 percent \[%\]) at the 4.5 millimeter (mm) and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DeepSEE (DS) 4-4.5 at 0.9 joules (J) with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 thermal coagulation points (TCPs) per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Overall Study
Lost to Follow-up
10
11
Overall Study
Early Termination
0
1

Baseline Characteristics

Simulines Non-Inferiority Pivotal Study

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Group A
n=127 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=135 Participants
Participants received single comparable treatment with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducer DS 4-4.5 at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0 S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Total
n=262 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
Age, Continuous
54.0 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.3 • n=5 Participants
52.6 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.0 • n=7 Participants
53.3 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.7 • n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
116 Participants
n=5 Participants
129 Participants
n=7 Participants
245 Participants
n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants
n=5 Participants
6 Participants
n=7 Participants
17 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian/ Alaska Native
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
3 Participants
n=7 Participants
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black/African American
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
3 Participants
n=7 Participants
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
3 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
123 Participants
n=5 Participants
127 Participants
n=7 Participants
250 Participants
n=5 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
127 Participants
n=5 Participants
135 Participants
n=7 Participants
262 Participants
n=5 Participants
Height
65.5 Centimeter (cm)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.0 • n=5 Participants
65.3 Centimeter (cm)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.0 • n=7 Participants
65.4 Centimeter (cm)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.0 • n=5 Participants
Weight
145.1 Kilogram (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 23.0 • n=5 Participants
142.1 Kilogram (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 22.3 • n=7 Participants
143.6 Kilogram (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 22.6 • n=5 Participants
Body mass index (BMI)
23.7 Kilogram per square meter (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.8 • n=5 Participants
23.4 Kilogram per square meter (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.8 • n=7 Participants
23.6 Kilogram per square meter (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.8 • n=5 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 90

Population: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of all participants in the SES for whom the primary efficacy variable was available.

Participant response was defined as \>=20 mm\^2 reduction in 2D submental area from baseline. Submandibular and Submental quantitative measurements were calculated comparing participants using prototype 2 simulines versus standard transducers. The standard 2D photographic images were obtained. Utilizing the lateral profile view of pre-and 90-day post treatment photos of each participant, quantitative results were calculated by using 5 evenly spaced points on the neck. Area was calculated between each of the 5 points and then sum of the 5 calculations was the total area of the region of interest. The delta area between the pre-and post-treatment area of the chin and neck determined the amount of tissue lift in the area.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=126 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=132 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants Who Achieved Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 20 mm^2 Reduction in Submental Area at Day 90
64 Participants
50 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 180

Population: No data was collected because the study was terminated at 180 days.

Participant response was defined as \>=20 mm\^2 reduction in 2D submental area from baseline. Submandibular and Submental quantitative measurements were calculated comparing participants using prototype 2 simulines versus standard transducers. The standard 2D photographic images were obtained. Utilizing the lateral profile view of pre-and 180-day post treatment photos of each participant, quantitative results were calculated by using 5 evenly spaced points on the neck. Area was calculated between each of the 5 points and then sum of the 5 calculations was the total area of the region of interest. The delta area between the pre-and post-treatment area of the chin and neck determined the amount of tissue lift in the area.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 365

Population: No data was collected because the study was terminated at 180 days.

Participant response was defined as \>=20 mm\^2 reduction in 2D submental area from baseline. Submandibular and Submental quantitative measurements were calculated comparing participants using prototype 2 simulines versus standard transducers. The standard 2D photographic images were obtained. Utilizing the lateral profile view of pre-and 180-day post treatment photos of each participant, quantitative results were calculated by using 5 evenly spaced points on the neck. Area was calculated between each of the 5 points and then sum of the 5 calculations was the total area of the region of interest. The delta area between the pre-and post-treatment area of the chin and neck determined the amount of tissue lift in the area.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 90

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in the SES for whom the primary efficacy variable was available.

Improvement was determined by qualitative assessment of photographs by a masked physician.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=126 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=132 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants Who Showed Improvement in Overall Lifting and Tightening of Skin at Day 90
67 Participants
51 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 180

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in the SES for whom the primary efficacy variable was available. Participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time period were included.

Improvement was determined by qualitative assessment of photographs by a masked physician.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=117 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=123 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants Who Showed Improvement in Overall Lifting and Tightening of Skin at Day 180
55 Participants
54 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 365

Population: No data was collected because the study was terminated at 180 days.

Improvement was determined by qualitative assessment of photographs by a masked physician.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 90

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in the SES for whom the primary efficacy variable was available. Participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time period were included.

Additional images were obtained using a 3D digital photo system. QuantifiCare 3D imaging was used to assess the volumetric changes. Four views (Face, UnderRight, UnderLeft, and Neck) were compared for each participant.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=7 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=8 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Percent Change From Baseline in Volume as Assessed by Quantificare 3 D Imaging System at Day 90
-0.8 Percent change
Standard Deviation 4.3
-4.1 Percent change
Standard Deviation 5.0

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 180

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in the SES for whom the primary efficacy variable was available.

Additional images were obtained using a 3D digital photo system. QuantifiCare 3D imaging was used to assess the volumetric changes. Four views (Face, UnderRight, UnderLeft, and Neck) were compared for each participant.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=7 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=8 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Percent Change From Baseline in Volume as Assessed by Quantificare 3D Imaging System at Day 180
-4.7 Percent change
Standard Deviation 5.6
0.5 Percent change
Standard Deviation 4.5

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 365

Population: No data was collected because the study was terminated at 180 days.

Additional images were obtained using a 3D digital photo system. QuantifiCare 3D imaging was used to assess the volumetric changes. Four views (Face, UnderRight, UnderLeft, and Neck) were compared for each participant.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 90

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in the SES for whom the primary efficacy variable was available. Participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time period were included.

Participants completed a patient satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ) at the 90-day visit. The PSQ has 5 improvement and satisfaction categories ranging from "worse" to "much improved" and "dissatisfied' to "very satisfied".

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=125 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=132 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Much improved
23 Participants
10 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
No change
21 Participants
36 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Improved
30 Participants
35 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
A little improved
48 Participants
49 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Worse
3 Participants
2 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Very satisfied
21 Participants
10 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Satisfied
40 Participants
40 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Slightly satisfied
28 Participants
37 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Neither satisfied or dissatisfied
26 Participants
37 Participants
Number of Participants With Some Level of Improvement and Satisfaction on Day 90
Dissatisfied
10 Participants
8 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Baseline

Population: The SES was the subset of all participants who were exposed to study treatment at least once.

Mean treatment time was based on a comparison of average time to complete treatment using each transducer type. The time to complete the study treatment for each group was recorded on the system treatment logs as treatment start time (time treatment started on the Ulthera system) and stop time (time treatment ended on the Ulthera system).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=127 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=135 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Mean Treatment Times
55.6 Minutes
Standard Deviation 15.2
33.1 Minutes
Standard Deviation 11.4

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Baseline

Population: The SES was the subset of all participants who were exposed to study treatment at least once.

Participant's treatment-related pain scores were obtained using a validated 11-point NRS with 0: no pain; 5: moderate pain; and 10: worst possible pain. Pain scores were obtained following each region treated (submandibular/submental and cheeks) and for each transducer used during treatment. Average pain score was calculated for each arm by adding all the scores of all participants in each arm to obtain the mean NRS score.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=127 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=135 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Mean Pain Scores to Assess Participant's Treatment Related Comfort Level Based on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)
4.5 mm Depth
5.5 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.1
4.6 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.0
Mean Pain Scores to Assess Participant's Treatment Related Comfort Level Based on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)
3.0 mm Depth
3.1 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.8
4.6 Score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.1

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 90

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in SES for whom primary efficacy variable was available.

Overall aesthetic improvement was assessed by participants using SGAIS. Each participant completed a SGAIS. The SGAIS was 5-point scale (1-5), where: 1 (very much improved); 2 (much improved); 3 (improved); 4 (no change); 5 (worse).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=126 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=132 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Subject Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (SGAIS) at Day 90
Improved
55 Participants
73 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Subject Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (SGAIS) at Day 90
Very much improved
12 Participants
3 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Subject Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (SGAIS) at Day 90
Much improved
18 Participants
13 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Subject Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (SGAIS) at Day 90
No change
37 Participants
41 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Subject Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (SGAIS) at Day 90
Worse
4 Participants
2 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 180

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in SES for whom primary efficacy variable was available. Participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time period were included.

Overall aesthetic improvement was assessed by participants using SGAIS. Each participant completed a SGAIS. The SGAIS was 5-point scale (1-5), where: 1 (very much improved); 2 (much improved); 3 (improved); 4 (no change); 5 (worse).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=118 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=127 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by SGAIS at Day 180
Much improved
18 Participants
18 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by SGAIS at Day 180
Improved
53 Participants
62 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by SGAIS at Day 180
No change
36 Participants
34 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by SGAIS at Day 180
Worse
2 Participants
3 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by SGAIS at Day 180
Very much improved
9 Participants
10 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 365

Population: No data was collected because the study was terminated at 180 days.

Overall aesthetic improvement was assessed by participants using SGAIS. Each participant completed a SGAIS. The SGAIS was 5-point scale (1-5), where: 1 (very much improved); 2 (much improved); 3 (improved); 4 (no change); 5 (worse).

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 90

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in SES for whom primary efficacy variable was available.

Overall aesthetic improvement was assessed by the clinician using a CGAIS. The CGAIS was 5-point scale (1-5), where: 1 (very much improved); 2 (much improved); 3 (improved); 4 (no change); 5 (worse).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=126 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=132 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Clinician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (CGAIS) at Day 90
Very much improved
10 Participants
8 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Clinician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (CGAIS) at Day 90
Much improved
33 Participants
34 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Clinician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (CGAIS) at Day 90
No change
20 Participants
24 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Clinician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (CGAIS) at Day 90
Worse
0 Participants
1 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by Clinician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (CGAIS) at Day 90
Improved
63 Participants
65 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 180

Population: The ITT population consisted of all participants in SES for whom primary efficacy variable was available. Participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time period were included.

Overall aesthetic improvement was assessed by the clinician using a CGAIS. The CGAIS was 5-point scale (1-5), where: 1 (very much improved); 2 (much improved); 3 (improved); 4 (no change); 5 (worse).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Group A
n=118 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=127 Participants
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by CGAIS at Day 180
Very much improved
5 Participants
11 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by CGAIS at Day 180
Much improved
32 Participants
20 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by CGAIS at Day 180
Improved
57 Participants
68 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by CGAIS at Day 180
No change
24 Participants
28 Participants
Number of Participants With Overall Aesthetic Improvement as Assessed by CGAIS at Day 180
Worse
0 Participants
0 Participants

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 365

Population: No data was collected because the study was terminated at 180 days.

Overall aesthetic improvement was assessed by the clinician using a CGAIS. The CGAIS was 5-point scale (1-5), where: 1 (very much improved); 2 (much improved); 3 (improved); 4 (no change); 5 (worse).

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

Adverse Events

Group A

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 24 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Group B

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 14 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Other adverse events
Measure
Group A
n=127 participants at risk
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 672 pulses (+5 %) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2, using standard transducers DS 4-4.5 at 0.9 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 7-3.0 at 0.30 J with pitch of 1.1 mm and 23 TCPs per line.
Group B
n=135 participants at risk
Participants received single Ultherapy treatment to the lower face and neck with a total minimum pulse count of 336 pulses (+5%) at the 4.5 mm and 3.0 mm depths at EL 2 using prototype 2 simulines transducers DS 4-4.5S at 1.23 J with pitch of 1.5 mm and 17 TCPs per line and DS 4-3.0S at 0.88 J with pitch of 1.3 mm and 20 TCPs per line.
General disorders
Bruising/Ecchymosis
3.1%
4/127 • Baseline up to 180 days
The investigator asked the participant for adverse events systematically at each visit.
2.2%
3/135 • Baseline up to 180 days
The investigator asked the participant for adverse events systematically at each visit.
General disorders
Edema
9.4%
12/127 • Baseline up to 180 days
The investigator asked the participant for adverse events systematically at each visit.
3.0%
4/135 • Baseline up to 180 days
The investigator asked the participant for adverse events systematically at each visit.
General disorders
Tenderness/Soreness/Pain/ Sensitivity to Touch
11.8%
15/127 • Baseline up to 180 days
The investigator asked the participant for adverse events systematically at each visit.
6.7%
9/135 • Baseline up to 180 days
The investigator asked the participant for adverse events systematically at each visit.

Additional Information

Public Disclosure Manager

Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH

Phone: +49 69 1503 1

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee Publication of study information usually requires agreement with the sponsor. In case of justified doubts by the sponsor, the INVESTIGATOR will consider these doubts in the publication as long as the scientific neutrality is not affected.
  • Publication restrictions are in place

Restriction type: OTHER