ArticleToxins2026
In Vivo Model of Short-Term Efficacy and Favorable Safety of Botulinum Toxin Type E Compared with Type A.
Article in Toxins, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Botulinum toxin suppresses neurotransmitter release, thereby inhibiting muscle contraction and inducing flaccid paralysis. Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A) is widely used for neuromuscular blockade but, upon repeated administration, may cause long-lasting muscle atrophy, fibrosis, and inflammation. It is produced as a single peptide chain that becomes activated through cleavage into a heavy and light chain. BoNT/E, like BoNT/A, is produced as a single-chain polypeptide and requires cleavage to generate the active dichain form. Although BoNT/E is known to have a faster onset and shorter duration of action compared with BoNT/A, its efficacy and safety have not been thoroughly investigated. We compared BoNT/E and BoNT/A in SKH-1 hairless mice. Neuromuscular blockade, recovery pattern, and changes in muscle weight, volume, fiber size, fibrosis, mast cell infiltration, and diffusion to adjacent muscles were evaluated over time. BoNT/E induced maximal neuromuscular blockade on day 3 and fully recovered by day 35, whereas BoNT/A reached maximal effect on day 7 and showed only 20% recovery of the vehicle group by day 35. BoNT/E caused transient, dose-dependent reductions in muscle weight, volume, fiber size, and fibrosis, which largely normalized by day 35. In contrast, BoNT/A, administered at a dose of 0.5 U per injection site, induced persistent muscle atrophy, fibrosis, and significantly increased mast cell infiltration under the experimental conditions used in this study. Neither BoNT/E nor BoNT/A showed diffusion to adjacent muscles or changes in body weight. These findings suggest that BoNT/E provides rapid onset, short duration, and favorable safety, supporting its potential as an alternative therapeutic option for indications requiring temporary muscle relaxation with minimized long-term adverse effects.
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.