OnabotulinumtoxinA Dosing, Disease Severity, and Treatment Benefit in Patients With Cervical Dystonia: A Cohort Analysis From CD PROBE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The Cervical Dystonia Patient Registry for Observation of OnabotulinumtoxinA Efficacy (CD PROBE) study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00836017), a multicenter, prospective, observational registry, was designed to identify real-world practices and outcomes for patients with cervical dystonia (CD) treated with onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA). This secondary analysis from CD PROBE aims to determine the impact of presentation subtype on onabotA utilization and CD severity. Materials and Methods: The study cohort includes those who completed all 3 treatments, 4 office visits, and had data recorded for all assessments. Patient outcomes were assessed with the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP-58), Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS), and determination of CD severity. Treatment interval, dose, and adverse events (AEs) were also recorded. Data were stratified according to prior exposure to botulinum toxins (BoNTs) and analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results: = 350); the proportion of patients with torticollis was highest in those with severe disease. At each treatment, between 40.7 and 65.2% of those categorized as severe shifted to moderate or mild severity after treatment. Sustained improvements in CDIP-58 and TWSTRS were observed regardless of prior exposure to BoNTs. Dosing of onabotA generally increased from injection 1 to injection 3 and tended to be lower for patients naïve to BoNT. Median time interval between injections for the study cohort was 94.0 to 97.5 days. The most common AEs (dysphagia, muscular weakness) and injection intervals were similar between naïve vs. non-naïve patients; there were no serious treatment-related AEs. Conclusions: This secondary cohort analysis from CD PROBE demonstrates that three repeat treatments with onabotA at intervals consistent with labeling attenuated disease severity and neck pain, resulting in sustained improvements in physician- and patient-reported outcomes. No new safety signals were identified.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".