Dysphagia and Muscle Weakness Secondary to Botulinum Toxin Type A Treatment of Cervical Dystonia: A Drug Class Analysis of Prescribing Information.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q2 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Toxins Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI:10.3390/toxins16100442
Khashayar Dashtipour, Han S Lee, Aaron Ellenbogen, Rashid Kazerooni, Todd M Gross, David A Hollander, Conor J Gallagher
{"title":"Dysphagia and Muscle Weakness Secondary to Botulinum Toxin Type A Treatment of Cervical Dystonia: A Drug Class Analysis of Prescribing Information.","authors":"Khashayar Dashtipour, Han S Lee, Aaron Ellenbogen, Rashid Kazerooni, Todd M Gross, David A Hollander, Conor J Gallagher","doi":"10.3390/toxins16100442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The first-line management of cervical dystonia (CD) symptoms is intramuscular injection of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA). However, a comparison of safety among BoNTAs is difficult because, per regulatory authorities, units of BoNTA activity are not interchangeable. Dysphagia and muscle weakness are widely considered two key adverse events to monitor closely in the treatment of CD. This integrated analysis compared the safety of BoNTAs approved for CD in the US by evaluating relationships between the incidence of dysphagia and muscle weakness in prescribing information and the core neurotoxin content. Coefficients The coefficients of determination (R<sup>2</sup>) and trendlines were estimated via regression-based lines of best fit. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) rates were strongly correlated with core neurotoxin amounts for conventional BoNTAs (slope coefficients: dysphagia = 0.048, R<sup>2</sup> = 0.74; muscle weakness = 0.096, R<sup>2</sup> = 0.82). The published ADR rates at approved doses for conventional BoNTAs were higher compared with DaxibotulinumtoxinA (DAXI; DAXXIFY<sup>®</sup>, Revance Therapeutics, Inc., Nashville, TN, USA) by core neurotoxin content. The use of a core neurotoxin amount was found to be an effective method for comparing the safety of BoNTA products. Current clinical trials suggest that DAXI, a novel BoNTA formulation, provides a potentially wider safety margin compared with other approved BoNTAs for CD. The lower amount of core neurotoxin administered at approved doses compared with conventional BoNTAs may explain low on-target ADRs like muscle weakness, whereas reduced diffusion from the injection site is thought to be responsible for low off-target ADRs like dysphagia.</p>","PeriodicalId":23119,"journal":{"name":"Toxins","volume":"16 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11510929/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxins","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins16100442","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The first-line management of cervical dystonia (CD) symptoms is intramuscular injection of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA). However, a comparison of safety among BoNTAs is difficult because, per regulatory authorities, units of BoNTA activity are not interchangeable. Dysphagia and muscle weakness are widely considered two key adverse events to monitor closely in the treatment of CD. This integrated analysis compared the safety of BoNTAs approved for CD in the US by evaluating relationships between the incidence of dysphagia and muscle weakness in prescribing information and the core neurotoxin content. Coefficients The coefficients of determination (R2) and trendlines were estimated via regression-based lines of best fit. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) rates were strongly correlated with core neurotoxin amounts for conventional BoNTAs (slope coefficients: dysphagia = 0.048, R2 = 0.74; muscle weakness = 0.096, R2 = 0.82). The published ADR rates at approved doses for conventional BoNTAs were higher compared with DaxibotulinumtoxinA (DAXI; DAXXIFY®, Revance Therapeutics, Inc., Nashville, TN, USA) by core neurotoxin content. The use of a core neurotoxin amount was found to be an effective method for comparing the safety of BoNTA products. Current clinical trials suggest that DAXI, a novel BoNTA formulation, provides a potentially wider safety margin compared with other approved BoNTAs for CD. The lower amount of core neurotoxin administered at approved doses compared with conventional BoNTAs may explain low on-target ADRs like muscle weakness, whereas reduced diffusion from the injection site is thought to be responsible for low off-target ADRs like dysphagia.

A 型肉毒毒素治疗颈肌张力障碍继发吞咽困难和肌肉无力:处方信息的药物类别分析》。
治疗颈肌张力障碍(CD)症状的一线疗法是肌肉注射 A 型肉毒毒素(BoNTA)。然而,由于监管机构规定 BoNTA 活性单位不可互换,因此很难比较不同 BoNTA 的安全性。吞咽困难和肌无力被广泛认为是治疗 CD 时需要密切监测的两个关键不良事件。本综合分析通过评估处方信息中吞咽困难和肌无力的发生率与核心神经毒素含量之间的关系,比较了美国批准用于 CD 的 BoNTAs 的安全性。系数 通过基于回归的最佳拟合线估算确定系数 (R2) 和趋势线。传统 BoNTAs 的药物不良反应(ADR)率与核心神经毒素含量密切相关(斜率系数:吞咽困难 = 0.048,R2 = 0.74;肌无力 = 0.096,R2 = 0.82)。与核心神经毒素含量较高的DaxibotulinumtoxinA(DAXI;DAXXIFY®,Revance Therapeutics, Inc.研究发现,使用核心神经毒素含量是比较 BoNTA 产品安全性的有效方法。目前的临床试验表明,与其他获批用于 CD 的 BoNTA 相比,新型 BoNTA 制剂 DAXI 的安全系数可能更高。与传统 BoNTA 相比,获批剂量的核心神经毒素用量较低,这可能是肌无力等低靶上 ADR 的原因,而注射部位扩散减少则被认为是吞咽困难等低靶外 ADR 的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Toxins
Toxins TOXICOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
765
审稿时长
16.24 days
期刊介绍: Toxins (ISSN 2072-6651) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal which provides an advanced forum for studies related to toxins and toxinology. It publishes reviews, regular research papers and short communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信