Safety, effectiveness, and duration of effect of BOTOX after switching from Dysport for blepharospasm, cervical dystonia, and hemifacial spasm

被引:61
|
作者
Bihari, K [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Inst Neurosurg, H-1145 Budapest, Hungary
关键词
blepharospasm; botulinum toxin type A; cervical dystonia; hemifacial spasm;
D O I
10.1185/030079905X36396
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Local injection of botulinum toxin type A is first-line treatment of blepharospasm, cervical dystonia, and hemifacial spasm; however, there is uncertainty about the optimal dose of toxin for each indication as well as dose-conversion ratios that should be used when switching products in clinical practice. Objective: The goal of this study was to compare the safety, effectiveness, and duration of clinical effect of BOTOX* and Dysport dagger after drug switching (Dysport to BOTOX) among patents with movement disorders. Methods.-A total of 48 patients diagnosed with blepharospasm (n = 27), cervical dystonia (n = 12), or hemifacial spasm (n = 9) were evaluated during a single-arm, crossover-design study in which each patient was his/her own historical control using a 5:1 or 4:1 conversion ratio of Dysport to BOTOX units. Patients were assessed (using Jankovic, Visual Analog Scale, general pain scale, Toronto Western Spasmodic Tiorticollis Rating Scale [TWSTRS] scores) after the last injection of Dysport and the first injection of BOTOX. Moreover, each patient kept a diary during treatment to track onset and duration of therapeutic effect. Results: Although BOTOX and Dysport were both clinically effective, this effect was more significant with BOTOX compared to Dysport based on TWSTRS for cervical dystonia (P = 0.012), and Jankovic scores for blepharospasm (p = 0.006). Longer duration of effect also was noted with BOTOX than with Dysport (blepharospasm, 62.2 days vs 47.4 days (p = 0.001); cervical dystonia, 64.3 days vs 44.6 days (p = 0.014); hemifacial spasm, 65.1 days vs 41.8 days (p < 0.014), respectively). Of the 48 patients, 19 experienced at least one adverse drug reaction (ADR) during Dysport treatment, with the most commonly reported ADRs being ptosis for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm and neck weakness for cervical dystonia. No patient reported an ADR during BOTOX treatment. Conclusions: Results suggest therapeutic effectiveness is enhanced with BOTOX compared to Dysport at a dosing ratio between 5:1 and 4:1 (Dysport:BOTOX). Safety and duration of therapeutic effect also are enhanced with BOTOX. Further research is needed.
引用
收藏
页码:433 / 438
页数:6
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [11] 12-year effectiveness and safety of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm
    Colorado-Ochoa, Hector J.
    Tenorio-Gonzalez, Victoria G.
    REVISTA MEXICANA DE NEUROCIENCIA, 2024, 25 (04): : 109 - 114
  • [12] The cost-effectiveness of abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport) and onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox) for managing spasticity of the upper and lower limbs, and cervical dystonia
    Danchenko, Natalya
    Johnston, Karissa M.
    Whalen, John
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2022, 25 (01) : 919 - 929
  • [13] Assessment of quality of life in patients with cervical dystonia and hemifacial spasm after botulinum toxin injections
    Elshebawy, Haidy
    Ramzy, Gihan M.
    Salama, Mohammed
    El-Jaafary, Shaimaa
    ACTA NEUROLOGICA BELGICA, 2025, : 707 - 716
  • [14] A Phase 3 Trial Evaluating the Efficacy, Duration of Effect, and Safety of DaxibotulinumtoxinA for Injection in the Treatment of Cervical Dystonia
    Jankovic, Joseph
    Comella, Cynthia
    Hauser, Robert A.
    Patel, Atul T.
    Gross, Todd M.
    Rubio, Roman G.
    Vitarella, Domenico
    TOXICON, 2022, 214 : S27 - S27
  • [15] Duration of Symptom Relief Between Injections for AbobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®) in Spastic Paresis and Cervical Dystonia: Comparison of Evidence From Clinical Studies
    Esquenazi, Alberto
    Delgado, Mauricio R.
    Hauser, Robert A.
    Picaut, Philippe
    Foster, Keith
    Lysandropoulos, Andreas
    Gracies, Jean-Michel
    FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY, 2020, 11