Quality of life improvements in patients with cervical dystonia following treatment with a liquid formulation of abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport® )

A comprehensive cognitive analysis of cervical dystonia: A single centre study

Introduction

Cervical dystonia (CD) presents as a motor disorder but has a number of non-motor features. Studies have demonstrated diverse changes in cognition in patients with CD. The rarity of this disorder, phenotypic heterogeneity, and, in particular, a lack of consistency in cognitive testing measures limits clear definition of cognitive changes in this disorder. The relationship between cognition, motor symptoms and quality of life has not been well defined. We undertook a comprehensive analysis of cognition in CD.

Methods

Patients with adult onset idiopathic isolated CD (AOICD) who had completed a battery of cognitive assessments- general intellectual functioning, verbal and visual memory, executive functions and social cognition measures, were included. Participants were assessed for mood symptoms, motor severity and quality of life.

Results

13 patients (8 women) with AOICD were included covering 40 cognitive subtests. Mean age was 59.9 years and mean TWSTRS-2 severity was 11. Mean estimated premorbid function was in the normal range. Overall performance on most measures were within normal limits. The lowest mean z-score was observed in Florida Affect Battery (social cognition) subtests, z = -1.75 and -0.81. and in verbal recall, z = -0.82. The majority of patients (75%) scored below population mean on spatial working memory and (62%) performed below population mean on word retrieval and working memory.

Conclusion

We provide detailed cognitive results across a wide range of measures. Although patients tended towards average outcomes on the majority of tests, poorer performance than expected averages were noted in measures of social cognition, word retrieval, spatial working memory and, processing speed.

Illness Perceptions, Coping, Health-Related Quality of Life and Psychological Outcomes in Cervical Dystonia

This study examined the predictive ability of the Common-Sense Model to explain psychological outcomes in cervical dystonia, a movement disorder that affects the muscles of the head and neck. Illness Perceptions Questionnaire-Revised, brief COPE, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile and the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory were completed by 118 people with cervical dystonia. Correlations and hierarchical multiple regression models were conducted. Illness perceptions and coping strategies explained 59% of variance in anxiety, 61% of variance in depression and health-related quality of life and 19% of variance in post-traumatic growth. Illness perceptions and coping strategies are significant factors to consider in terms of psychological adjustment and outcomes in cervical dystonia. Psychological interventions targeting illness perceptions and coping strategies may be beneficial in improving psychological outcomes for people with cervical dystonia.

Does ultrasound-guidance improve the outcome of botulinum toxin injections in cervical dystonia?

PURPOSE

Ultrasound-guided injections of botulinum neurotoxin in cervical dystonia have a number of theoretical advantages. However, their action has never been compared to that of non-guided injections. The objectives of the study were to compare the outcome of botulinum neurotoxin type A treatment in patients with idiopathic, focal cervical dystonia, according to two methods: inspection and palpation of anatomical landmarks (non-guided group) or ultrasound guidance (ultrasound-guided group).

METHODS

We included consecutive patients in this single-center, prospective, real-life, non-randomized study. The outcomes were evaluated one month after the injections: Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile 58 (main outcome), Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale-2 (pain and disability subscores), Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale-PSYCH, patient-rated Clinical Global Impression - Improvement and adverse events. We used propensity score methods for statistical analysis; ten predefined confounding factors were used to build the propensity score.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were included in the non-guided group, and 60 other patients in the ultrasound-guided group. We found no difference in main and secondary outcomes between the two study groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the first direct comparison between ultrasound-guided and non-guided botulinum neurotoxin type A injections in patients with cervical dystonia. We hypothesize that ultrasound guidance made it possible to obtain the same results in the most severe (or the most demanding) patients as in the best responders. Further studies are still needed to assess the impact of botulinum neurotoxin injections into deep cervical muscles.

Low-Dose Neubotulinum Toxin A versus Low-Dose Abobotulinum Toxin A Injection for the Treatment of Cervical Dystonia: A Multicenter, 48-Week, Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized Crossover Design Study

Various types of botulinum toxin (BoNT) have been studied to treat cervical dystonia (CD). Although high-dose BoNT has proven efficacy, it increases the risk of adverse events. For this reason, this study was planned to identify the non-inferiority efficacy, tolerability, and safety of low-dose neubotulinum toxin A (Neu-BoNT-A) versus low-dose abobotulinum toxin A (Abo-BoNT-A) in CD treatment. The 48-week, prospective, randomized, controlled crossover design study of CD treatment, with 50-unit Neu-BoNT-A and 250-unit Abo-BoNT-A injections at 12-week intervals, was conducted over a 24-week treatment period. This study used the following standardized rating scales to assess the efficacy of BoNT: the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS); health-related quality of life (HRQoL); the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP-58); the Short Form 36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36); and, for the depressive symptoms of CD patients, the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Fifty-two CD patients were enrolled from October 2019 to January 2021. The mean scores of the TWSTRS total at the post-treatments in both Neu-BoNT-A and Abo-BoNT-A had a significant reduction from baseline (p = 0.008 and 0.002, respectively). However, the mean changes of the TWSTRS total at the 12- and 24-week treatments between the two treatment groups were not significantly different (p = 0.284 and 0.129, respectively). The mean scores of the HRQoL questionnaires (the CIDP-58 and the SF-36) and the depressive symptoms (the CES-D and the PHQ-9) in both treated groups at the post-treatments did not significantly decrease from baseline and were comparable. Two patients treated with Abo-BoNT-A (250 units) reported cervical tension and benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). There were no serious adverse events reported. Though both low-dose BoNT-As were effective at improving clinical symptoms without significant side effects, both treatments did not predict change in quality of life and depression. With the non-inferiority criteria, low-dose Neu-BoNT-A has a similar efficacy, safety, and tolerability to Abo-BoNT-A.

Economic evaluation of AbobotulinumtoxinA vs OnabotulinumtoxinA in real-life clinical management of cervical dystonia

Background

Botulinum neurotoxins type A (BoNT-As) are commonly used treatments for cervical dystonia (CD). Clinical trials have demonstrated the benefits of them in these patients, but data from real-life clinical practice as well as comparative data on the cost and outcome of different BoNT-A formulations are limited. The aim of this study was to compare abobotulinumtoxinA (aboBoNT-A) and onabotulinumtoxinA (onaBoNT-A) on their clinical outcomes and drug costs in real-life clinical practice.

Methods

This analysis included 356 adult patients with idiopathic CD treated with aboBoNT-A (n = 253) or onaBoNT-A (n = 103) from 38 centres across Europe and Australia (NCT00833196). The clinical outcome measures were treatment responses, changes in TWSTRS scores and changes in health utility scores from baseline to study visit 2 and 3. Health utility score was mapped from the TWSTRS total scale, using a previous publication. Costs included drug cost for France.

Results

The aboBoNT-A treated group had 2.06 (95% CI: 1.15 to 3.69) times higher odds of achieving treatment response than the onaBoNT-A treated group. The adjusted mean change in TWSTRS total score from baseline to visit 3 were - 6.42 (95% CI: - 7.52 to - 5.33) for aboBoNT-A and - 3.94 (95% CI: - 5.68 to - 2.2) for onaBoNT-A, with a difference of - 2.48 (95% CI: - 4.57 to - 0.39). The corresponding difference in the adjusted mean change for health utility score was 0.008 (95% CI: 0.001 to 0.014). Mean treatment costs for aboBoNT-A and onaBoNT-A were 314.1 (95% CI: 299.1 to 329.0) and 346.6 (95% CI: 322.9 to 370.4) Euros, respectively.

Conclusions

This comparative analysis indicated that treatment with aboBoNT-A may be less costly and lead to improved clinical outcomes when compared with onaBoNT-A, from a French healthcare system perspective. Additional comparative clinical data from larger patient cohorts, as well as more information about cost consequences of an improvement in clinical outcome would be of value to further confirm the findings.