Long‐term efficacy of botulinum toxin A in treatment of various movement disorders over a 10‐year period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although botulinum toxin A (BTX) has been licensed in Canada for treatment of various movement disorders since 1990, few clinical studies regarding its long-term efficacy and side effects have been reported. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 235 patients who received BTX from our movement disorders clinic over a 10-year period (January 1990 to December 1999). A total of 2,616 treatment cycles (multiple injections) were administered to 235 patients with cervical dystonia (CD), hemifacial spasm (HS), blepharospasm (BP), and other movement disorders. Substantial benefit at 5 years was seen in most patients (90% in BP, 88% in HS, 63% in CD, 100% in jaw closing and lower limb dystonia, and 56% in writer's cramp). Benefit was maintained for up to 10 years in CD, HS, and BP data, with a 75.8% benefit reported. Twenty-eight percent of patients discontinued treatment during the follow-up period due to a variety of reasons. Of these, 9.1% of patients developed primary resistance, and 7.5% of patients secondary resistance. Adverse effects, mostly minor, developed in 27% of patients at any one time, occurring over 4.5% of treatment cycles. These were most frequently reported in blepharospasm (22 of 36 patients in 40 cycles), followed by hemifacial spasm (21 of 70 patients in 46 cycles), and cervical dystonia (17 of 106 in 28 cycles). Only 1.3% of patients discontinued therapy due intolerable adverse effects. The results show that BTX is a safe and effective treatment of various types of movement disorders, and most side effects are well tolerated. Discontinuation for any reason was also low after 5 years. Efficacy was maintained after long periods of treatment with high degree of patient satisfaction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".