4.7 Review

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

Journal

TOXINS
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins8030065

Keywords

incobotulinum toxin A; onabotulinum toxin-A; abobotulinum toxin-A; botulinum neurotoxin

Funding

  1. Department of Oncology, University of Milan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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((R)), abobotulinum toxin-A (ABO), Dysport((R)), and incobotulinum toxin A (INCO, Xeomin((R))). 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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available