MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005803867 · doi:10.1016/j.jns.2014.08.004

IncobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin®) injected for blepharospasm or cervical dystonia according to patient needs is well tolerated

2014· article· en· W2005803867 on OpenAlexaff
Virgilio Gerald H. Evidente, Daniel Truong, Joseph Jankovic, Cynthia Comella, Susanne Grafe, Angelika Hanschmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Neurological Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement Disorders
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlepharospasmMedicineCervical dystoniaAnesthesiaPtosisPlaceboBotulinum toxinDosingAdverse effectEyelidDysphagiaSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Typically, botulinum toxin injections for blepharospasm or cervical dystonia (CD) are administered at approximately 3-month intervals, reflecting concerns that shorter intervals might increase the risk of adverse events (AEs) and development of neutralizing antibodies. These post-hoc analyses investigated flexible incobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin®) injection intervals (6-20 weeks) in patients with blepharospasm or CD. Patients received up to 6 injections at intervals ≥ 6 weeks, as determined by physician assessment upon patient request. The blepharospasm study permitted flexible doses (≤ 50 U/eye). The CD study employed fixed dosing using incobotulinumtoxinA 120 U, 240 U, or placebo for the first treatment followed by subsequent randomization to 120 U or 240 U for the extension period. Standard safety assessments were performed. Intervals <12 weeks were employed in 207 of 461 (44.9%) treatment cycles for blepharospasm and in 369 of 821 (44.9%) treatment cycles for CD. The most frequent AEs were eyelid ptosis and dry eyes in patients treated for blepharospasm, and dysphagia and neck pain in patients with CD. AE frequency and severity were similar for intervals <12 weeks and ≥ 12 weeks in both studies. In conclusion, repeated incobotulinumtoxinA injections employing flexible intervals (6-20 weeks) per patients' needs were well tolerated. No additional safety concerns were observed with <12-week intervals compared with ≥ 12-week intervals.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Neurological SciencesSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207