2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.prdoa.2022.100142
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficacy and safety of two incobotulinumtoxinA injection intervals in cervical dystonia patients with inadequate benefit from standard injection intervals of botulinum toxin: Phase 4, open-label, randomized, noninferiority study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
16
0
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Injection schedules, doses and approaches (either ultrasound or anatomical landmark guidance) of BTX varies in clinical practice. Notably, studies have revealed that different injection schedules and doses of BTX might be associated with different efficacies and risks of TRAEs 13 14 45. In these eligible studies included in the present systematic review and meta-analysis, the injection dose of BTX can be as small as a few IU per limb in the study by Lindholm et al in 201738 and as large as intramuscular injections of 5000 units of BTX into the soleus-gastrocnemius complex of the predominantly affected leg in the study by Fernandez et al in 2004 34.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Injection schedules, doses and approaches (either ultrasound or anatomical landmark guidance) of BTX varies in clinical practice. Notably, studies have revealed that different injection schedules and doses of BTX might be associated with different efficacies and risks of TRAEs 13 14 45. In these eligible studies included in the present systematic review and meta-analysis, the injection dose of BTX can be as small as a few IU per limb in the study by Lindholm et al in 201738 and as large as intramuscular injections of 5000 units of BTX into the soleus-gastrocnemius complex of the predominantly affected leg in the study by Fernandez et al in 2004 34.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies of BoNT-A treatment in CD have shown persistent reductions in pain during long-term treatment with aboBoNT-A [ 33 , 34 ], onaBoNT-A [ 5 , 35 ], and incoBoNT-A [ 21 , 27 , 28 ] when pain was scored using the TWSTRS and/or a pain numeric rating scale. A ≥30% improvement from baseline in pain score was also noted in a large cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe pain treated with onaBoNT-A in the CD-PROBE observational study [ 24 ] and in a meta-analysis of observational studies of aboBoNT-A in patients with CD [ 26 ], supporting the use of ≥30% reduction in pain as a clinically relevant measure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The TWSTRS covers a range of CD features, including disease severity, functional ability, and pain [ 36 ]. IncoBoNT-A has been shown to effectively control CD symptoms after each injection, as reflected by improvements in the TWSTRS total score and TWSTRS subscale scores for motor severity, disability, and pain [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 27 , 28 ]. However, the TWSTRS does have several drawbacks, including its complexity for use in clinical practice and it does not consider the location of pain [ 36 ], which may lead to an underestimation of pain severity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations