Efficacy of botulinum toxin type B (rimabotulinumtoxinB) in patients with cervical dystonia previously treated with botulinum toxin type A: A post-marketing observational study in Japan
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, efficacy data on botulinum toxin type B (rimabotulinumtoxinB) in patients with cervical dystonia (CD) previously treated with botulinum toxin type A in a large population are lacking; thus, we aimed to evaluate type B efficacy in this patient population. In a post-marketing observational cohort study, 150 patients previously treated with botulinum toxin type A were enrolled, of whom 138 were followed up for 1 year after the initial type B injection. Final observation data were available for 122 patients. Efficacy was evaluated using the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale. Total score improved from 39.9 at baseline to 34.3 at 4 weeks after the first injection, and pain score improved from 8.9 to 7.9. Improvements were maintained through six further injections in two subpopulations: patients who showed resistance to botulinum toxin type A and patients who were not type A resistant but switched to type B. For a number of patients, even low doses (<5000 units) of botulinum toxin type B demonstrated efficacy. These findings support the efficacy of botulinum toxin type B in clinical settings for the management of CD symptoms, including pain, even at low doses, regardless of the patient's botulinum toxin type A resistance status.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it