What the studies show
The subjective arm of the same trial. A 48.9%-versus-0% split is a large number from a small unreplicated study, and subjective grading in a topical trial is the endpoint most sensitive to expectation.
“In the subjective evaluation, the total anti-wrinkle efficacy in the argireline group was 48.9 %, compared with 0 % in the placebo group.”
A few small or poorly-controlled human studies. Enough to be interesting; not enough to count on. Most of what gets called “clinically proven” online lives here.
- 1Wang Y, Wang M, Xiao S, Pan P, Li P, Huo J. The anti-wrinkle efficacy of argireline, a synthetic hexapeptide, in Chinese subjects: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.Am J Clin Dermatol, 2013;14:147–15360 subjects, randomised 3:1, 4 weeks, twice-daily periorbital application.
In context
Argireline is a synthetic hexapeptide (acetyl hexapeptide-8) modelled on the end of SNAP-25, the protein botulinum toxin cuts, and sold in serums as a topical wrinkle treatment. Its human evidence is one 60-person randomised trial over four weeks, which reported reduced periorbital roughness and a 48.9% subjective anti-wrinkle rate against 0% on placebo. The same study appears three times in the 2013 literature under different titles. It is a legal cosmetic ingredient everywhere LYO covers and is not a medicine.
Argireline is cosmetic ingredient. Legal status differs by country — see the regulation section or the jurisdiction pages.
Questions
Is Argireline proven to help with subjective wrinkle improvement?
What studies are behind the grade?
Is Argireline approved for this?
Other outcomes for Argireline
- CPeriorbital wrinkles and skin roughness (topical)1 RCT (n=60, 4 wk)
- DComparison with botulinum toxinNone
- CSafety (topical)adverse1 RCT (n=60)
Written and maintained by LYO Research — how pages are written and checked. Reviewed 29 October 2026. Grades count human evidence only; see how LYO grades. Not medical advice. Correct this page →