ArticleToxins2021
Practical Application of Novel Test Methods to Evaluate the Potency of Botulinum Toxin: A Comparison Analysis among Widely Used Products in Korea.
Article in Toxins, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- An automated platform for simultaneous, longitudinal analysis of engineered neuromuscular tissues for applications in neurotoxin potency testing.Current research in toxicology · 2025Article
- A Phase-III Noninferiority, Randomized Controlled Trial of Letibotulinum Toxin A for the Improvement of Moderate-to-Severe Glabellar Wrinkles in China.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- An Update on the Cosmetic Use of Botulinum Toxin: The Pattern of Practice among Korean Dermatologists.Toxins · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The safe and effective dosing of botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs) requires accurate and reliable methods to measure their potency. Several novel methods have been introduced over the past decade; however, only few studies have compared the potency of BoNT products with that of the LD50 and other alternative assays. Therefore, the objective of this study was to comparatively evaluate widely used BoNT products using various test methods. Four types of BoNTs (prabotulinumtoxin A, onabotulinumtoxin A, neubotulinumtoxin A, and letibotulinumtoxin A) were used in this study. The estimated potency was assessed using the LD50 assay, and the total BoNT type A protein levels were measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The in vitro efficacy of the BoNTs was determined using fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) and surface plasmon resonance (SPR) assays. The results showed differences in the total amount of BoNT protein and the cleavage activity of SNAP-25 within all types of BoNTs. The SPR study seemed to be useful for evaluating the potency by specifically measuring intact 19S neurotoxin, and these results provide new insights for assessing different BoNT products.
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.