Neutralizing antibodies in dystonic patients who still respond well to botulinum toxin type A

"Pseudo"-Secondary Treatment Failure Explained via Disease Progression and Effective Botulinum Toxin Therapy: A Pilot Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to provide evidence from a simple simulation. In patients with focal dystonia, an initial good response to botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) injections followed by a secondary worsening does not necessarily arise from an antibody-induced secondary treatment failure (NAB-STF), but may stem from a "pseudo"-secondary treatment failure (PSEUDO-STF).

METHODS

The simulation of the outcome after BoNT long-term treatment was performed in four steps: 1. The effect of the first single BoNT injection (SI curve) was displayed as a 12-point graph, corresponding to the mean improvement from weeks 1 to 12. 2. The remaining severity of the dystonia during the nth injection cycle was calculated by subtracting the SI curve (weighted by the outcome after n - 1 cycles) from the outcome after week 12 of the (n - 1)th cycle. 3. A graph was chosen (the PRO curve), which represents the progression of the severity of the underlying disease during BoNT therapy. 4. The interaction between the outcome during the nth BoNT cycle and the PRO curve was determined.

RESULTS

When the long-term outcome after n cycles of BoNT injections (applied every 3 months) was simulated as an interactive process, subtracting the effect of the first cycle (weighted by the outcome after n - 1 cycles) and adding the progression of the disease, an initial good improvement followed by secondary worsening results. This long-term outcome depends on the steepness of the progression and the duration of action of the first injection cycle. We termed this response behavior a "pseudo"-secondary treatment failure, as it can be compensated via a dose increase.

CONCLUSION

A secondary worsening following an initial good response in BoNT therapy of focal dystonia might not necessarily indicate neutralizing antibody induction but could stem from a "PSEUDO"-STF (a combination of good response behavior and progression of the underlying disease). Thus, an adequate dose adaptation must be conducted before diagnosing a secondary treatment failure in the strict sense.

The complex relationship between antibody titers and clinical outcome in botulinum toxin type A long-term treated patients with cervical dystonia

Background

Repeated injections with abo- or onabotulinumtoxin type A (aboBoNT/A, onaBoNT/A) may lead to induction of neutralizing antibodies (NABs) and/or a secondary treatment failure (STF). The relation between NABs and STF is still unclear.

Aim of the study

To demonstrate that a significant improvement can be observed in patients with STF after abo- or onaBoNT/A-treatment when switched to incobotulinumtoxin type A (incoBoNT/A) and that in NAB-positive patients without STF abo- or onaBoNT/A-treatment can be continued without significant worsening.

Methods

Paralysis times (PT) of the mouse hemidiaphragm assay (MHDA) and clinical outcome (TSUI-score) was analyzed in 60 patients with cervical dystonia (CD) and STF after abo- or onaBoNT/A-treatment (STF-group) who were switched to incobotulinumtoxin type A (incoBoNT/A). These data were compared to those of 34 patients who were exclusively treated with incoBoNT/A (INCO-group). Furthermore, PTs and TSUI-scores were followed up over 7 years in 9 patients with NABs but without STF who were switched to inco-BoNT/A (SWI-group) and 9 other patients with NABs who remained on their previous BoNT/A preparation (NO-SWI-group).

Results

In the STF-group, a significant improvement of TSUI-scores could be detected after switch to incoBoNT/A. This improvement was less pronounced than in the INCO-group. There was no significant difference in long-term outcome between the SWI- and NO-SWI-group.

Conclusion

The best strategy is to avoid the induction of NABs. A switch to incoBoNT/A may lead to improvement in patients with STF. However, in some patients with NABs without STF, BoNT/A-treatment can be continued without significant worsening.

Botulinum Toxin Type A Immunogenicity across Multiple Indications: An Overview Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Botulinum toxin type A has been used to treat a wide array of neurologic, medical, and aesthetic indications. Several factors contribute to the formation of neutralizing antibodies, such as shorter intervals of treatment, higher dosage, amounts of antigenic proteins, serotypes, and storage of formulations.

METHOD

This overview followed the Cochrane guideline for overview reviews. The AMSTAR-2 (revised version of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) tool was used for the critical appraisal of the selected systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Five systematic reviews consisting of 203 studies (17,815 patients) were included, and their AMSTAR-2 scores were low to critically poor. There was high heterogeneity between the studies. Across the clinical indications, neutralizing antibody prevalence was significantly higher in dystonia, spasticity, and urologic conditions, and nil to insignificant in hyperhidrosis and aesthetic indications. The overall rate for the neutralizing antibody formation across three different formulations, abobotulinumtoxinA, incobotulinumtoxinA, and onabotulinumtoxinA, was 1 to 2.1 percent, with no significant difference between them.

RESULTS

Although there is debate on the prevalence rate across the different botulinum toxin type A formulations in individual systematic reviews, the overall frequency of the development of neutralizing antibodies and the immunogenicity of abobotulinumtoxinA, incobotulinumtoxinA, and onabotulinumtoxinA remain low to insignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

Properly designed comparative trials are required to explore the difference in the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies across the commercially available botulinum toxin type A products. Such studies should also examine the relevance of neutralizing antibody titer to clinical responsiveness and nonresponse.

Significant Long-Lasting Improvement after Switch to Incobotulinum Toxin in Cervical Dystonia Patients with Secondary Treatment Failure

Under continuous long-term treatment with abo- or onabotulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A), ~10 to 15% of patients with cervical dystonia (CD) will develop neutralizing antibodies and reduced responsiveness over an ~10-year treatment period. Among the botulinum neurotoxin type A preparations so far licensed for CD, incobotulinum toxin A (incoBoNT/A; Xeomin^®) is the only one without complex proteins. Whether CD patients with treatment failure under abo- or onaBoNT/A may still respond to incoBoNT/A is unknown. In this cross-sectional, retrospective study, 64 CD patients with secondary treatment failure after abo- or onaBoNT/A therapy who were switched to incoBoNT/A were compared to 34 CD patients exclusively treated with incoBoNT/A. The initial clinical severity of CD, best outcome during abo- or onaBoNT/A therapy, severity at the time of switching to incoBoNT/A and severity at recruitment, as well as all corresponding doses, were analyzed. Furthermore, the impact of neutralizing antibodies (NABs) on the long-term outcome of incoBoNT/A therapy was evaluated. Patients significantly improved after the switch to incoBoNT/A (p < 0.001) but did not reach the improvement level obtained before the development of partial secondary treatment failure or that of patients who were exclusively treated with incoBoNT/A. No difference between abo- and onaBoNT/A pretreatments or between the long-term outcomes of NAB-positive and NAB-negative patients was found. The present study demonstrates significant long-term improvement after a switch to incoBoNT/A in patients with preceding secondary treatment failure after abo- or onaBoNT/A therapy and confirms the low antigenicity of incoBoNT/A.

Immunogenicity to Botulinum Toxin Type A: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis Across Therapeutic Indications

BACKGROUND

Botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) is commonly employed as a neuromodulator in several neurological diseases and aesthetic indications. Formation of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) after BTX-A injections may be responsible for treatment failure.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to quantify the prevalence of NAbs following treatment with Abobotulinumtoxin A, Incobotulinumtoxin A, and Onabotulinumtoxin A for therapeutic indications.

METHODS

An electronic systematic search (2000-2020) of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase was conducted. Original studies reporting prevalence of NAbs were included. Data analysis was carried out through open meta-analysis softwares.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies involving 8833 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of NAbs was 1.8% (summary estimate = 0.018, 95% CI [0.012, 0.023]); a meta-regression analysis revealed that BTX-A duration was significantly associated with increased incidence of NAbs (P = 0.007). Patients with dystonia had the highest incidence (7.4%) of NAbs against BTX-A (summary estimate = 0.074, 95% CI = [0.045, 0.103], I2 = 93.%, P < 0.00) followed by patients with spasticity (6.7%) and urological indications (6.2%). Abobotulinumtoxin A was associated with the highest incidence of NAbs (7.4%) (summary estimate = 0.074, 95% CI = [0.053, 0.096], I2 = 97.24%, P < 0.00) by the Incobotulinumtoxin A and Onabotulinumtoxin A 0.3% (summary estimate <0.003%, 95% CI = [-0.001, 0.007], P < 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the overall incidence of NAbs following BTX-A injections is relatively low, patients with secondary nonresponse to BTX-A with no apparent causes should be investigated for NAbs. A consensus needs to be developed for the optimal management of such patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Immunogenicity of Botulinum Toxin Formulations: Potential Therapeutic Implications

Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs) are proteins produced by bacteria of the Clostridium family. Upon oral ingestion, BoNT causes the neuroparalytic syndrome botulism. There are seven serotypes of BoNT (serotypes A-G); BoNT-A and BoNT-B are the botulinum toxin serotypes utilized for therapeutic applications. Treatment with BoNT injections is used to manage chronic medical conditions across multiple indications. As with other biologic drugs, immunogenicity after long-term treatment with BoNT formulations may occur, and repeated use can elicit antibody formation leading to clinical nonresponsiveness. Thus, approaching BoNT treatment of chronic conditions with therapeutic formulations that minimize stimulating the host immune response while balancing patient responsiveness to therapy is ideal. Immunogenicity is a clinical limitation in many settings that use biologic drugs for treatment, and clinically relevant immunogenicity reduction has been achieved through engineering smaller protein constructs and reducing unnecessary formulation components. A similar approach has influenced the evolution of BoNT formulations. Three BoNT-A products and one BoNT-B product have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for therapeutic use: onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, incobotulinumtoxinA, and rimabotulinumtoxinB; a fourth BoNT-A product, daxibotulinumtoxinA, is currently under regulatory review. Additionally, prabotulinumtoxinA is a BoNT-A product that has been approved for aesthetic indications but not therapeutic use. Here, we discuss the preclinical and clinical immunogenicity data that exist within the scientific literature and provide a perspective for considering immunogenicity as a key factor in choice of BoNT formulation.

Transient Improvement after Switch to Low Doses of RimabotulinumtoxinB in Patients Resistant to AbobotulinumtoxinA

Botulinum toxin type B (BoNT/B) has been recommended as an alternative for patients who have become resistant to botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A). This study aimed to compare the clinical effect, within a patient, of four injections with low doses of rimabotulinumtoxinB with the effect of the preceding abobotulinumtoxinA (aboBoNT/A) injections. In 17 patients with cervical dystonia (CD) who had become resistant to aboBoNT/A, the clinical effect of the first four rimabotulinumtoxinB (rimaBoNT/B) injections was compared to the effect of the first four aboBoNT/A injections using a global assessment scale and the TSUI score. After the first two BoNT/B injections, all 17 patients responded well and to a similar extent as to the first two BoNT/A injections, but with more side effects such as dry mouth and constipation. After the next BoNT/B injection, the improvement started to decline. The response to the fourth BoNT/B injection was significant (p < 0.048) lower than the fourth BoNT/A injection. Only three patients developed a complete secondary treatment failure (CSTF) and five patients a partial secondary treatment failure (PSTF) after four BoNT/B injections. In nine patients, the usual response persisted. With the use of low rimaBoNT/B doses, the induction of CSTF and PSTF to BoNT/B could not be avoided but was delayed in comparison to the use of higher doses. In contrast to aboBoNT/A injections, PSTF and CSTF occurred much earlier, although low doses of rimaBoNT/B had been applied.

Clinical relevance of neutralizing antibodies in botulinum toxin long-term treated still-responding patients with cervical dystonia

Background:

The aim of the study was to test the clinical relevance of neutralizing antibodies (NABs) in patients with cervical dystonia (CD) still responding to repeat injections with botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A).

Methods:

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-test evidence from a cross-sectional study on 221 CD-patients with treatment durations of between 2 and 21 years and still responding to repeat BoNT/A-injections showed the presence of antibodies against BoNT/A in 39 patients. A mouse hemi-diaphragm (MHDA) confirmation test was performed in these 39 ELISA-positive patients, and demographic (age, sex, age at onset of CD) and treatment-related (duration of treatment, mean dose of the last 10 injections, TSUI-score, patient’s subjective scoring of the treatment effect, patient’s scoring of quality of life by means of the CDQ24-questionnaire) data from these 39 patients were compared with data from ELISA-negative patients. Paralysis time, the MHDA outcome measure, was correlated with clinical data.

Results:

The ELISA-positive CD-patients had significantly higher TSUI-scores (p < 0.015), and had been treated for significant longer (p < 0.022) and with significantly higher doses (p < 0.001). Patient’s rating of BoNT/A-treatment effect and quality of life tended to be worse in ELISA-positive compared with ELISA-negative patients. The paralysis time of ELISA-positive patients was significantly correlated with the mean dose of the last 10 injections (p < 0.027) and the pain subscore of the CDQ24 (p < 0.012).

Conclusions:

Presence of NABs is clinically relevant in CD, leading to a significantly worse head position, therapy with significantly higher BoNT/A doses, and a correlation between the CDQ24 pain-subscore and antibody titers.

Immunogenicity Associated with Botulinum Toxin Treatment

Botulinum toxin (BoNT) has been used for the treatment of a variety of neurologic, medical and cosmetic conditions. Two serotypes, type A (BoNT-A) and type B (BoNT-B), are currently in clinical use. While considered safe and effective, their use has been rarely complicated by the development of antibodies that reduce or negate their therapeutic effect. The presence of antibodies has been attributed to shorter dosing intervals (and booster injections), higher doses per injection cycle, and higher amounts of antigenic protein. Other factors contributing to the immunogenicity of BoNT include properties of each serotype, such as formulation, manufacturing, and storage of the toxin. Some newer formulations with purified core neurotoxin devoid of accessory proteins may have lower overall immunogenicity. Several assays are available for the detection of antibodies, including both structural assays such as ELISA and mouse-based bioassays, but there is no consistent correlation between these antibodies and clinical response. Prevention and treatment of antibody-associated non-responsiveness is challenging and primarily involves the use of less immunogenic formulations of BoNT, waiting for the spontaneous disappearance of the neutralizing antibody, and switching to an immunologically alternate type of BoNT.

Safety and Patient Satisfaction of AbobotulinumtoxinA for Aesthetic Use: A Systematic Review

A systematic review of the published literature (from January 2000 to January 2016) to ascertain the safety of, and patient satisfaction with, the aesthetic use of abobotulinumtoxinA was conducted. In addition to the licensed indications, other special populations were considered for discussion. The potential impact of neutralizing antibodies and systemic toxicity were also addressed. A total of 364 papers were screened and 86 were found to be relevant to the population, intervention(s), and outcomes stipulated in the protocol. The safety and patient satisfaction data from these publications are discussed in this review.

Clinical Practice: Evidence-Based Recommendations for the Treatment of Cervical Dystonia with Botulinum Toxin

Cervical dystonia (CD) is the most frequent form of focal dystonia. Symptoms often result in pain and functional disability. Local injections of botulinum neurotoxin are currently the treatment of choice for CD. Although this treatment has proven effective and is widely applied worldwide, many issues still remain open in the clinical practice. We performed a systematic review of the literature on botulinum toxin treatment for CD based on a question-oriented approach, with the aim to provide practical recommendations for the treating clinicians. Key questions from the clinical practice were explored. Results suggest that while the beneficial effect of botulinum toxin treatment on different aspects of CD is well established, robust evidence is still missing concerning some practical aspects, such as dose equivalence between different formulations, optimal treatment intervals, treatment approaches, and the use of supportive techniques including electromyography or ultrasounds. Established strategies to prevent or manage common side effects (including excessive muscle weakness, pain at injection site, dysphagia) and potential contraindications to this treatment (pregnancy and lactation, use of anticoagulants, neurological comorbidities) should also be further explored.

High Botulinum Toxin-Neutralizing Antibody Prevalence Under Long-Term Cervical Dystonia Treatment

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies in a large cohort of long-term treated patients with cervical dystonia (CD) still responding to repetitive injections with botulinum toxin (BoNT).

METHODS

Consecutively recruited CD patients (n = 221) under long-term BoNT treatment (≥2-21 years) underwent a clinical examination at the same time blood samples were taken for neutralizing antibody determination. Collected data included demographics, mean dose of the last 10 botulinum injections, treatment duration, Tsui score for CD severity, and patients' subjective impression of treatment effect. Blood samples were screened for antibody presence by ELISA; positive samples were further analyzed by mouse hemidiaphragm test. The two laboratories performing antibody testing were blinded to the coded samples.

RESULTS

Antibody status could be determined for 212 patients; 39 (18.4%) were ELISA positive and 31 (14.6%) additionally positive in the mouse hemidiaphragm test. Patients with positive neutralizing antibody titers had significantly higher Tsui scores and were treated for a significantly longer time with significantly higher doses. There were no differences between male and female patients and between onabotulinumtoxinA- and abobotulinumtoxinA-treated patients. When BoNT preparations had been switched during the last 10 injections, a significantly higher proportion of neutralizing antibody-positive patients was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Neutralizing antibody prevalence in long-term treated, still responding CD patients is substantially higher than suggested by follow-up studies with a shorter time frame. It should therefore be emphasized that antigenicity of BoTN preparations is still a relevant problem and should be taken into account in long-term treatment decisions.

Considerations on patient-related outcomes with the use of botulinum toxins: is switching products safe?

Introduction

Botulinum toxin (BoNT) is the treatment of choice for many neurologic movement disorders, including blepharospasm, hemifacial spasm, and cervical dystonia. There are two serotypes approved for use by the US Food and Drug Administration: three brands of serotype A and one of serotype B. Many attempts have been made at establishing dose conversion ratios between brands and serotypes. This review focuses on the existing data comparing different formulations of the same BoNT serotypes as well as that comparing different serotypes with one another. We focus on existing data regarding switching from one formulation or serotype to another and will also discuss the issue of immunogenicity of BoNT. With this information as a foundation, recommendations on safety of switching agents are addressed.

Method

Literature review searching PubMed and Google Scholar using the search terms “switching botox”, “dosing equivalency in botox”, and “comparing botox”.

Results/conclusion

Overall, there are many studies that demonstrate the efficacy and safety of each of the brands of BoNTs used in clinical practice. However, determination of dosing equivalencies among these brands and serotypes is complex with inconsistencies among the studies. When switching from one brand to another, the clinician should be aware of these issues, and not make the assumption that such ratios exist. Tailoring the dosage of each brand of BoNT to the clinical situation is the most prudent treatment strategy rather than focusing closely on conversion factors and concerns for immunogenicity.

Pharmaceutical, biological, and clinical properties of botulinum neurotoxin type A products

Botulinum neurotoxin injections are a valuable treatment modality for many therapeutic indications and have revolutionized the field of aesthetic medicine so that they are the leading cosmetic procedure performed worldwide. Studies show that onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, and incobotulinumtoxinA are comparable in terms of clinical efficacy. Differences between the products relate to the botulinum neurotoxin complexes, specific biological potency, and their immunogenicity. Protein complex size and molecular weight have no effect on biological activity, stability, distribution, or side effect profile. Complexing proteins and inactive toxin (toxoid) content increase the risk of neutralizing antibody formation, which can cause secondary treatment failure, particularly in chronic disorders that require frequent injections and long-term treatment. These attributes could lead to differences in therapeutic outcomes, and, given the widespread aesthetic use of these three neurotoxin products, physicians should be aware of how they differ to ensure their safe and effective use.

Neutralizing antibodies to botulinum neurotoxin type A in aesthetic medicine: five case reports

Botulinum neurotoxin injections are a valuable treatment modality for many therapeutic indications as well as in the aesthetic field for facial rejuvenation. As successful treatment requires repeated injections over a long period of time, secondary resistance to botulinum toxin preparations after repeated injections is an ongoing concern. We report five case studies in which neutralizing antibodies to botulinum toxin type A developed after injection for aesthetic use and resulted in secondary treatment failure. These results add to the growing number of reports in the literature for secondary treatment failure associated with high titers of neutralizing antibodies in the aesthetic field. Clinicians should be aware of this risk and implement injection protocols that minimize resistance development.

Very early reduction in efficacy of botulinum toxin therapy for cervical dystonia in patients with subsequent secondary treatment failure: a retrospective analysis

The objective of this study was to estimate the probability of development of partial secondary treatment failure (PSTF) in patients with cervical dystonia (CD) who had been treated over up to 9 years with repetitive intramuscular injections of botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT/A). The temporal course of treatment response in patients in whom PSTF was detected retrospectively was compared to patients with a normal clinical response. For this purpose, charts of all CD patients treated in our outpatient clinic between 1988 and 2001 were retrospectively analyzed. Extracted data included time of all injections, dose per visit, disease severity measured by TSUI scores, and time of determination of neutralizing antibodies. Final data analysis using a special formal definition of PSTF was based on charts of 568 patients having exclusively been treated with abobotulinumtoxinA. PSTF onset was observed in our CD cohort during the entire treatment period analyzed, with no clustering at any time point. Probability to develop PSTF was 14.5 % in 9 years. Thus, mean PSTF incidence was 1.6 % per year. The mean TSUI score of patients with retrospectively defined PSTF (n = 33) became already significantly worse after the second injection when compared with the group without PSTF (n = 535). Our data indicate that clinical response in patients developing PSTF later on differs from that of patients without PSTF already very early in the course of botulinum neurotoxin type A treatment, and that PSTF remains undetected at this early stage. Reduced response may therefore be present in a number of CD patients who think they still respond normally to continuous BoNT/A treatment.

Clinical relevance of botulinum toxin immunogenicity

Botulinum toxin type A is a 150 kD protein produced by Clostridium botulinum, which exists in a complex with up to six additional proteins. The ability of botulinum toxin to inhibit acetylcholine release at the neuromuscular junction has been exploited for use in medical conditions characterized by muscle hyperactivity. As such, botulinum toxin is widely recommended by international treatment guidelines for movement disorders and it has a plethora of other clinical and cosmetic indications. The chronic nature of these conditions requires repeated injections of botulinum toxin, usually every few months. Multiple injections can lead to secondary treatment failure in some patients that may be associated with the production of neutralizing antibodies directed specifically against the neurotoxin. However, the presence of such antibodies does not always render patients non-responsive. The reported prevalence of immunoresistance varies greatly, depending on factors such as study design and treated indication. This review presents what is currently known about the immunogenicity of botulinum toxin and how this impacts upon patient non-response to treatment. The complexing proteins may act as adjuvants and stimulate the immune response. Their role and that of neutralizing and non-neutralizing antibodies in the response to botulinum toxin is discussed, together with an assessment of current neutralizing antibody measurement techniques. Botulinum toxin preparations with different compositions and excipients have been developed. The major commercially available preparations of botulinum toxin are Botox® (onabotulinumtoxinA; Allergan, Inc., Ireland), Dysport® (abobotulinumtoxinA; Ipsen Ltd, UK), and Xeomin® (incobotulinumtoxinA; botulinum toxin type A [150 kD], free from complexing proteins; NT 201; Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH, Germany). The new preparations of botulinum toxin aim to minimize the risk of immunoresistance in patients being treated for chronic clinical conditions.

Immunoresistance in cervical dystonia patients after treatment with abobotulinumtoxinA

Formation of antibodies against botulinum toxin type A has been observed following treatment of Cervical Dystonia (CD). We present the immunological findings from two 12-week Phase III prospective, randomized, double-blind, single-dose, placebo-controlled studies (Study 1, n = 116; Study 2, n = 136). Patients in both studies were administered abobotulinumtoxinA 500U or placebo intramuscularly at baseline. Patients could receive up to three or four additional treatments (250-1000U) in an open-label follow-up period. Blood samples were collected at baseline and during treatment to test for antibodies to abobotulinumtoxinA using a radioimmunoprecipitation assay (Study 2 only) and a mouse protection assay. Loss of response was predefined using the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) total score at 4 weeks following injection. No subjects in Study 1 and one individual in Study 2 developed neutralizing antibodies (nABs) during the double-blind treatment phase; the individual who developed immunoresistance had received botulinum toxin type A treatment prior to the study and did not respond to treatment. Two subjects demonstrated a change in nAB status during open-label treatment and overall responsiveness was maintained in these patients. In conclusion, the development of immunoresistance was rare and, in the presence of circulating nABs, patients may still gain benefit from intramuscular abobotulinumtoxinA treatment.

Respective potencies of Botox and Dysport in a human skin model: a randomized, double-blind study

Mouse units used to quantify the activity of botulinum A toxin preparations are not equivalent and issues concerning efficacy and safety remain with regard to their respective potencies and diffusion qualities in human tissue. We compared the effects of Botox (BOT) and Dysport (DYS) in different doses and dilutions in a human skin model. Eighteen (8 women, 10 men) healthy volunteers, aged 28.4 years +/- 5.7 years were injected intradermally with pure saline, BOT and DYS at 16 points in the abdomen in random order and in a double-blind condition, using two conversion ratios (1:3 and 1:4) and three different dilution schemes. For an objective outcome, the Ninhydrin sweat test was used to compare the anhidrotic areas. Both preparations showed a linear dose and dilution relationship with similar variances of responses for anhidrosis and hypohidrosis, indicating the same reliability of response. The dose equivalence conversion ratios (BOT: DYS) were 1:1.3 for anhidrosis and 1:1.6 for hypohidrosis (1:1.1-1.5 and 1:1.4-1.8 95% confidence intervals). The diffusion characteristics of both products were similar. A dose equivalence factor of more than 1:2 (BOT:DYS) is not supported by these objective and reproducible data.