Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30519475›Full record

ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2018

A comparison of biological activity of commercially available purified native botulinum neurotoxin serotypes A1 to F1 in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo.

Sarah Donald, Mark Elliott, Bryony Gray, Fraser Hornby, Agnieszka Lewandowska, Sandra Marlin, Christine Favre-Guilmard, Cindy Périer, Sylvie Cornet, Mikhail Kalinichev and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Comparative Pharmacodynamics Study of 3 Different Botulinum Toxin Type A Preparations in Mice.Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.] · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Sarah DonaldIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.
Mark ElliottIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.
Bryony GrayIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.
Fraser HornbyIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.
Agnieszka LewandowskaIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.
Sandra MarlinIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.
Christine Favre-GuilmardIpsen Innovation Les Ulis France.
Cindy PérierIpsen Innovation Les Ulis France.
Sylvie CornetIpsen Innovation Les Ulis France.
Mikhail KalinichevIpsen Innovation Les Ulis France.
Johannes KruppIpsen Innovation Les Ulis France.
Elena FonfriaIpsen Bioinnovation Abingdon Oxford UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8816-519X
Ipsen (United Kingdom) · GBIpsen (France) · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) is a major therapeutic agent. Of seven native BoNT serotypes (A to G), only A and B are currently used in the clinic. Here we compared the potency of commercially available purified native serotypes A1 to F1 across in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo assays. BoNT potency in vitro was assessed in rat primary cells (target protein cleavage and neurotransmitter release assays) in supraspinal, spinal, and sensory systems. BoNT potency ex vivo was measured in the mouse phrenic nerve hemidiaphragm (PNHD) assay, measuring muscle contractility. In vivo

Indexed as

SerogroupAnimalsBiological AssayBody WeightBotulinum ToxinsClostridium botulinumDiaphragmDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleMaleMiceModels, AnimalMuscle RelaxationNeuronsNeurotoxinsPhrenic NerveBotulinum ToxinsNeurotoxinsBoNTcharacterizationdigit abduction scorehemidiaphragm assaynatural toxinserotype

Identifiers

PMID30519475
PMCPMC6261930
OpenAlexW2902717520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.