Next Article in Journal
DNA Aptamers against Taiwan Banded Krait α-Bungarotoxin Recognize Taiwan Cobra Cardiotoxins
Previous Article in Journal
Isolation of Anti-Ricin Protective Antibodies Exhibiting High Affinity from Immunized Non-Human Primates
Article Menu
Issue 3 (March) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessReview
Toxins 2016, 8(3), 65; doi:10.3390/toxins8030065

Conversion Ratio between Botox®, Dysport®, and Xeomin® in Clinical Practice

Department of Oncology and Onco-Hematology, University of Milan, Via Vanvitelli 32, 20129 Milan, Italy
Academic Editor: Flaminia Pavone
Received: 21 December 2015 / Revised: 23 February 2016 / Accepted: 26 February 2016 / Published: 4 March 2016
(This article belongs to the Section Bacterial Toxins)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [236 KB, uploaded 4 March 2016]

Abstract

Botulinum neurotoxin has revolutionized the treatment of spasticity and is now administered worldwide. There are currently three leading botulinum neurotoxin type A products available in the Western Hemisphere: onabotulinum toxin-A (ONA) Botox®, abobotulinum toxin-A (ABO), Dysport®, and incobotulinum toxin A (INCO, Xeomin®). Although the efficacies are similar, there is an intense debate regarding the comparability of various preparations. Here we will address the clinical issues of potency and conversion ratios, as well as safety issues such as toxin spread and immunogenicity, to provide guidance for BoNT-A use in clinical practice. INCO was shown to be as effective as ONA with a comparable adverse event profile when a clinical conversion ratio of 1:1 was used. The available clinical and preclinical data suggest that a conversion ratio ABO:ONA of 3:1—or even lower—could be appropriate for treating spasticity, cervical dystonia, and blepharospasm or hemifacial spasm. A higher conversion ratio may lead to an overdosing of ABO. While uncommon, distant spread may occur; however, several factors other than the pharmaceutical preparation are thought to affect spread. Finally, whereas the three products have similar efficacy when properly dosed, ABO has a better cost-efficacy profile. View Full-Text
Keywords: botulinum neurotoxin; onabotulinum toxin-A; abobotulinum toxin-A; incobotulinum toxin A botulinum neurotoxin; onabotulinum toxin-A; abobotulinum toxin-A; incobotulinum toxin A
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Scaglione, F. Conversion Ratio between Botox®, Dysport®, and Xeomin® in Clinical Practice. Toxins 2016, 8, 65.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Toxins EISSN 2072-6651 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top