ArticleToxicon: X2021
Analgesic potential of different available commercial brands of botulinum neurotoxin-A in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice.
Article in Toxicon: X, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Botulinum Toxin Injection to Treat Bruxism in a Child: A Case Report and Technique Description.Cureus · 2026Article
- Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-Expressing Neurons in the External Lateral Parabrachial Area Regulate Pain-Induced Sleep Disturbances.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Identifying the Brain Circuits that Regulate Pain-Induced Sleep Disturbances.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of botulinum neurotoxin-A (BoNT-A) is an alternative for the management of orofacial pain disorders. Although only Botox has labeled, there are other commercial brands available for use, among them: Dysport, Botulift, Prosigne, and Xeomin. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the possible differences in the antinociceptive effect evoked by different commercially available formulations of BoNT-A in an animal model of inflammatory orofacial pain induced by formalin injection. Male C57/BL6 mice (20-25 g) were submitted to the pre-treatment with five different commercial brands of BoNT-A (Botox, Botulift, Xeomin, Dysport, or Prosigne; with doses between 0.02 and 0.2 Units of Botulinum Toxin, in 20 μL of 0.9% saline) three days prior the 2% formalin injection. All injections were made subcutaneously into the right perinasal area. After formalin injections, nociceptive behaviors like rubbing the place of injection were quantified during the neurogenic (0-5 min) and inflammatory (15-30 min) phases. The treatment using Botox, Botulift, and Xeomin were able to induce antinociceptive effects in both phases of the formalin-induced pain animal model, however, Dysport and Prosigne reduced the response in neither of them. Our data suggest that the treatment using different formulations of BoNT-A is not similar in efficacy as analgesics when evaluated in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice.
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.