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

Botulinum Toxin in Movement Disorders: An Update

Since its initial approval in 1989 by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of blepharospasm and other facial spasms, botulinum toxin (BoNT) has evolved into a therapeutic modality for a variety of neurological and non-neurological disorders. With respect to neurologic movement disorders, BoNT has been reported to be effective for the treatment of dystonia, bruxism, tremors, tics, myoclonus, restless legs syndrome, tardive dyskinesia, and a variety of symptoms associated with Parkinson’s disease. More recently, research with BoNT has expanded beyond its use as a powerful muscle relaxant and a peripherally active drug to its potential central nervous system applications in the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders. Although BoNT is the most potent biologic toxin, when it is administered by knowledgeable and experienced clinicians, it is one of the safest therapeutic agents in clinical use. The primary aim of this article is to provide an update on recent advances in BoNT research with a focus on novel applications in the treatment of movement disorders. This comprehensive review of the literature provides a critical review of evidence-based clinical trials and highlights recent innovative pilot studies.

Neurotoxin Impurities: A Review of Threats to Efficacy

Recently launched esthetic botulinum toxin serotype A (BoNT/A) products include Nabota/Jeuveau, Meditoxin/Neuronox, and Botulax, which contain nontoxic accessory proteins and excipients. Clinical evidence supporting these formulations, including their purity and potential immunogenicity or their link to treatment failures, is limited. Any nonhuman protein, including nontoxin accessory proteins, can initiate immune reactions, especially if administered repeatedly, yet the issue of BoNT/A-induced immunogenicity is widely contested. However, there have been multiple reports of treatment failures and observations of BoNT/A-induced neutralizing antibodies. Compared with the purified formulation in Xeomin, these recently launched toxins contain higher total neurotoxin quantities, much of which is inactive and exposes patients to potentially immunogenic nontoxin proteins or inactive neurotoxins that increase their risk of developing treatment failure. Well-established products [especially abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport), onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox) and Xeomin] are accompanied by comprehensive and long-ranging clinical evidence on safety and efficacy in esthetic facial indications, which still remains undisclosed for many of the recently introduced toxins. Clinicians need this information as patients will require repeated BoNT treatments and may be unnecessarily but cumulatively exposed to potential immunogens. To underscore the need for caution and further evidence, we review some of the issues surrounding BoNT/A-induced immunogenicity and antibody-induced treatment failures and argue that using highly purified toxins that do not negatively impact patient outcomes is a prudent clinical decision.