SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005
Botulinum toxin type A versus botulinum toxin type B for cervical dystonia.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Botulinum toxin type A versus botulinum toxin type B for cervical dystonia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Botulinum toxin type B for cervical dystonia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Botulinum Toxin in Pediatric Neurology: Switching Lanes From Death to Life.Global pediatric health · 2015Article
- Myoclonus-dystonia syndrome: case report.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2014Article
- Rating scales for cervical dystonia: a critical evaluation of tools for outcome assessment of botulinum toxin therapy.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2013Review
- Clinical uses of botulinum neurotoxins: current indications, limitations and future developments.Toxins · 2012Review
- Current and future medical treatment in primary dystonia.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2012Article
- Treatment of focal dystonia.Current treatment options in neurology · 2012Article
- Nonoperative management of spasticity in children.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2007Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical dystonia is the most common form of focal dystonia. It is characterized by involuntary posturing of the head and frequently is associated with neck pain. Disability and social withdrawal are common. Most cases are idiopathic, and generally it is a life-long disorder. In recent years, botulinum toxin type A (BtA) has become first line therapy for cervical dystonia. However, not all patients respond well to BtA, and 5 to 10% become resistant to it. Botulinum toxin B (BtB) is an alternative to BtA and offers the potential to help patients who do not respond to BtA. At present there is no compelling theoretical reason why it should not be as effective as, or even more effective than, BtA.
objectivesTo compare the clinical efficacy and safety of BtA versus BtB in cervical dystonia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies for inclusion in the review were identified using the Cochrane Movement Disorders Group trials register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, by handsearching the Movement Disorders Journal and abstracts of international congresses on movement disorders and botulinum toxin, by communication with other researchers in the field, by searching reference lists of papers found using the above search strategies, and by contact with authors and drug manufacturer. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were considered eligible for inclusion in the review if they evaluated the efficacy of BtA versus BtB for the treatment of cervical dystonia. Trials must have been randomised and placebo-controlled. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A paper pro-forma was used to collect data from the included studies using double extraction by two independent reviewers. Each trial was assessed for internal validity by each of the two reviewers. Differences were settled by discussion. The outcome measures used included improvement in symptomatic rating scales, subjective evaluation by patients and clinicians, changes in pain scores, changes in quality of life assessments, and frequency and severity of adverse events. MAIN
resultsWe cannot give any results since we have only identified two ongoing trials and there are no preliminary results or interim analyses available for them. The full results of these trials are expected in late 2004 or 2005. AUTHORS'
conclusionsIt is currently not possible to make definitive comparisons between BtA and BtB for the treatment of cervical dystonia; uncontrolled comparisons should be regarded with suspicion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.