Botulinum neurotoxin has revolutionized the treatment of spasticity and is now administered worldwide. There are currently three leading botulinum neurotoxin type A products available in theWestern Hemisphere: onabotulinum toxin-A (ONA) Botox®, abobotulinum toxin-A (ABO), Dysport®, and incobotulinum toxin A (INCO, Xeomin®). Although the efficacies are similar, there is an intense debate regarding the comparability of various preparations. Here we will address the clinical issues of potency and conversion ratios, as well as safety issues such as toxin spread and immunogenicity, to provide guidance for BoNT-A use in clinical practice. INCO was shown to be as effective as ONA with a comparable adverse event profile when a clinical conversion ratio of 1:1 was used. The available clinical and preclinical data suggest that a conversion ratio ABO:ONA of 3:1—or even lower—could be appropriate for treating spasticity, cervical dystonia, and blepharospasm or hemifacial spasm. A higher conversion ratio may lead to an overdosing of ABO. While uncommon, distant spread may occur; however, several factors other than the pharmaceutical preparation are thought to affect spread. Finally, whereas the three products have similar efficacy when properly dosed, ABO has a better cost-efficacy profile.

Conversion Ratio between Botox((R)), Dysport((R)), and Xeomin((R)) in Clinical Practice / F. Scaglione. - In: TOXINS. - ISSN 2072-6651. - 8:3(2016 Mar), pp. 65.1-65.10. [10.3390/toxins8030065]

Conversion Ratio between Botox((R)), Dysport((R)), and Xeomin((R)) in Clinical Practice

F. Scaglione
2016

Abstract

Botulinum neurotoxin has revolutionized the treatment of spasticity and is now administered worldwide. There are currently three leading botulinum neurotoxin type A products available in theWestern Hemisphere: onabotulinum toxin-A (ONA) Botox®, abobotulinum toxin-A (ABO), Dysport®, and incobotulinum toxin A (INCO, Xeomin®). Although the efficacies are similar, there is an intense debate regarding the comparability of various preparations. Here we will address the clinical issues of potency and conversion ratios, as well as safety issues such as toxin spread and immunogenicity, to provide guidance for BoNT-A use in clinical practice. INCO was shown to be as effective as ONA with a comparable adverse event profile when a clinical conversion ratio of 1:1 was used. The available clinical and preclinical data suggest that a conversion ratio ABO:ONA of 3:1—or even lower—could be appropriate for treating spasticity, cervical dystonia, and blepharospasm or hemifacial spasm. A higher conversion ratio may lead to an overdosing of ABO. While uncommon, distant spread may occur; however, several factors other than the pharmaceutical preparation are thought to affect spread. Finally, whereas the three products have similar efficacy when properly dosed, ABO has a better cost-efficacy profile.
incobotulinum toxin A; onabotulinum toxin-A; abobotulinum toxin-A; botulinum neurotoxin
Settore BIO/14 - Farmacologia
mar-2016
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
toxins-08-00065.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 235.75 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
235.75 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/376975
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 52
  • Scopus 180
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 140
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact