MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283747534 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.914486

OnabotulinumtoxinA Dosing, Disease Severity, and Treatment Benefit in Patients With Cervical Dystonia: A Cohort Analysis From CD PROBE

2022· article· en· W4283747534 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pinky Agarwal, Richard L. Barbano, Henry J. Moore, Marc Schwartz, Aleksej Zuzek, Marjan Sadeghi, Atul T. Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervical dystoniaMedicineSpasmodic TorticollisCohortBotulinum toxinDosingPhysical therapyCohort studyInternal medicineAdverse effectProspective cohort studyTorticollisPediatricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207