Pain Reduction in Cervical Dystonia Following Treatment with IncobotulinumtoxinA: A Pooled Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This analysis pooled pain severity data from four phase 3 and 4 studies of incobotulinumtoxinA (incoBoNT-A) for the treatment of cervical dystonia (CD) in adults. CD-related pain severity was assessed at baseline, each injection visit, and 4 weeks after each injection of incoBoNT-A using the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale pain severity subscale or a pain visual analog scale. Both were analyzed using a score range of 0–10 and pain was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe. Data for 678 patients with pain at baseline were assessed and sensitivity analyses evaluated pain responses in the subgroup not taking concomitant pain medication (n = 384 at baseline). At Week 4 after the first injection, there was a mean change of −1.25 (standard deviation 2.04) points from baseline pain severity (p < 0.0001), with 48.1% showing ≥ 30% pain reduction from baseline, 34.4% showing ≥50% pain reduction from baseline, and 10.3% becoming pain free. Pain responses were sustained over five injection cycles with a trend to incremental improvements with each successive cycle. Pain responses in the subgroup not taking concomitant pain medication demonstrated the lack of confounding effects of pain medications. These results confirmed the pain relief benefits of long-term treatment with incoBoNT-A.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".