ArticleToxins2025
Switox: Retrospective Analysis of Botulinum Toxin Switching in Management of Spasticity.
Article in Toxins, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Switching adult patients with spasticity from onabotulinumtoxinA to abobotulinumtoxinA: a real-world data analysis across three US-based treatment centers.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- Long-term safety and treatment discontinuation patterns of OnabotulinumtoxinA for post-stroke spasticity: a retrospective study.BMC neurology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This retrospective study investigates botulinum toxin changes in 206 patients with spasticity, following reimbursement adjustments in France. The main objective was to evaluate the tolerance and efficacy of these changes, a topic underexplored due to the common practice of maintaining the same toxin brand. The majority of patients switched from Botox to Xeomin (73.66%), while others switched from Botox to Dysport (14.63%) or from Xeomin to Dysport (11.71%). Dose adjustments varied depending on the switch, with the change from Botox to Xeomin showing the greatest diversity in adjustments. Overall, tolerance was good, with few adverse effects reported, primarily fatigue. Perceived efficacy fluctuated, with some patients noting improvement while others experienced deterioration, but the median remained stable. A majority of patients (57.06%) chose to continue with their new treatment, indicating general satisfaction, though 42.93% preferred to return to their initial treatment. This study highlights the importance of an individualized approach and careful monitoring during toxin changes. The results suggest that toxin switches can be made without an increase in adverse effects. While differences between groups were observed, they were not statistically significant. Placebo and nocebo effects may influence perceptions of efficacy and side effects during treatment changes.
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.