Jeuveau Before and After: The Scale, the Double Assessment, and the Test to Do First
Reviewed for medical accuracy against our Medical Review Board · Last updated 2 September 2026
Part of Botox vs Other Brands
Before and after photographs are the weakest evidence in aesthetics and the most persuasive marketing in it. Lighting, camera angle and how hard someone is frowning move a glabellar photo more than a treatment does.
So instead of showing you pictures, here is what Jeuveau's own trials measured, how they measured it, and what the result would look like on your face if you were one of the people it worked for.
The number, and why it is stricter than it sounds. 68% and 70% of patients improved by two grades on a four-point scale, at Day 30. And it only counted if the investigator and the patient each scored it that way independently. Most before and after claims rest on one observer, usually the person who did the injecting.
What a "grade" actually means
The trials used the Glabellar Line Scale, a four-point scale assessed at maximum frown:
| Grade | Severity |
|---|---|
| 0 | None |
| 1 | Mild |
| 2 | Moderate |
| 3 | Severe |
To enter the trial you had to be at at least moderate severity when frowning as hard as you could. To count as a success you had to improve by two grades.
Do the arithmetic on that, because it is the part that gets lost. On a four-point scale, moving two grades means severe to none, or moderate to none. There is no way to move two grades and still have a visible line at maximum frown. A one-grade improvement, severe to moderate, would have been recorded as a failure.
So 68% and 70% are not "some improvement". They are the share of people whose frown lines effectively disappeared when they frowned. The remaining 30% or so include everyone who improved by one grade, which most people would call a good result.
Both the doctor and the patient had to agree
This is the design detail that makes the number worth something, and it is unusual.
The primary endpoint was a composite: the improvement had to be assessed independently by both the investigator and the subject, each using the Glabellar Line Scale, and both had to record at least a two-grade change. If the doctor saw it and the patient did not, it was not a success. If the patient was delighted and the doctor scored one grade, not a success.
Compare that with a typical clinic before and after, where one person selects the photographs, chooses which pair to publish, and decides what counts as an improvement. That is not fraud, it is just a much weaker form of evidence than two independent assessments against a defined scale.
For what happened in the group that received no drug at all, and why that column matters more than the treated one, see the full Jeuveau guide. Our Dysport before and after page runs the same argument on that product's day-by-day data.
The eligibility rule that decides whether it will work on you
Buried in the trial design is the single most useful predictor of your own result, and we have not seen it mentioned on any consumer page.
The trials excluded anyone who could not substantially lessen their glabellar lines by physically spreading the lines apart. They also excluded people with existing ptosis or deep dermal scarring.
Try it in a mirror. Put a finger either side of the lines between your brows and gently stretch the skin apart.
- If the lines largely vanish, they are dynamic. They are being made by muscle, and a muscle relaxant is the right tool. You resemble the people in the trial.
- If they stay, they are static: creased into the skin itself. No neurotoxin will erase them, because there is no muscle to switch off in the crease. Those people were not eligible for the trial, so the 68% figure never described them.
That is why some people are disappointed after a technically perfect treatment. Static lines soften a little as the muscle stops deepening them, and they may improve over repeated treatments, but they need something that treats skin rather than muscle. Our page on frown lines and the glabella covers what does address them.
Who was in the photographs
The trial population, which is who the numbers describe:
| EV-001 and EV-002 combined | |
|---|---|
| Total enrolled | 654, randomised 3 to 1 |
| Received Jeuveau | 492 |
| Received placebo | 162 |
| Age range | 18 to 81, mean 51 |
| Aged 65 and over | 68 people (10%) |
| Women | 91% |
| White | 84% |
Nine in ten were women and mean age was 51. The label adds that although no differences in safety or efficacy were observed between older and younger subjects, the trials did not include enough people over 65 to determine whether they respond differently.
How to judge your own result honestly
If you want to know whether your treatment worked as well as the trial's, copy the trial's method rather than a clinic's.
- Photograph at maximum frown, not at rest. The entire scale is assessed at maximum frown. A relaxed-face before paired with a relaxed-face after shows almost nothing.
- Same light, same distance, same angle, no makeup. Take the "before" on the day of treatment, immediately before it.
- Judge at Day 30. That is the trial's timepoint. Judging at day 3 tells you nothing, and the label describes onset building over the first week.
- Grade it yourself on the four-point scale, and ask your injector to do the same separately. That is literally the trial's method. If you disagree, that disagreement is information.
- Do the stretch test first, so you know before you spend anything whether your lines are the kind this treats.
For what the label does and does not say about how long any of it holds, see how long Jeuveau lasts, and for which areas have a labelled dose at all, Jeuveau by area and units.
Why we do not publish before and after photos
Two reasons, and both are about you rather than us.
We hold no rights to the trial photographs, which are the only images tied to the numbers on this page. Any other pair we could show you would be someone else's marketing, chosen by whoever wanted to sell the treatment.
And a photograph cannot be verified. Frown intensity, lighting direction, camera focal length and time of day change a glabellar line more than 20 units does. A pair taken two weeks apart under different lights can show an improvement that is not there, or hide one that is.
What we can give you is the measurement method, the scale, the timepoint and the eligibility rule, so you can run the assessment on your own face. If you want to see what an unsatisfactory result looks like and what to do about it, we cover that in Botox gone wrong and droopy eyelid after Botox. For the two products side by side, see Botox vs Jeuveau.
Frequently asked questions
How good are Jeuveau results?
When should I judge my Jeuveau result?
Why did Jeuveau not work on my frown lines?
Are Jeuveau before and after photos reliable?
What is the Glabellar Line Scale?
Do results differ by age?
Sources
Every figure on this page was read from the documents below rather than from a clinic or a manufacturer's marketing. They open in a new tab so you can check any claim here against its source.
- JEUVEAU (prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs) for injection, full prescribing information, US National Library of Medicine, DailyMed
- FDA-approved botulinum toxin products, US Food and Drug Administration
Know the count before the quote. The unit count is half the bill, and a low per-unit rate recovered by a high unit count is the commonest way a deal is not one. How to tell.
Deciding which area, not how many units? Botox by facial area covers what each zone actually achieves, which four are FDA approved, and the things Botox cannot fix at all.
