Suppr超能文献

用于治疗颈部肌张力障碍的B型肉毒毒素

Botulinum toxin type B for cervical dystonia.

作者信息

Costa J, Espírito-Santo C, Borges A, Ferreira J J, Coelho M, Moore P, Sampaio C

机构信息

Instituto de Farmacologia e Terapêutica Geral, Faculdade de Medicina Lisboa, Av. Prof. Egas Moniz, Lisboa, Portugal, 1649-028.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jan 25(1):CD004315. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004315.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cervical dystonia is the most common form of focal dystonia. It is characterized by involuntary posturing of the head and frequently is associated with neck pain. Disability and social withdrawal are common. Most cases of cervical dystonia are idiopathic and generally it is a life-long disorder. In recent years, Botulinum toxin type A (BtA) has become the first line therapy. However, some patients become resistant to it. This problem led to the study of another Botulinum toxin (Bt) serotype, Bt type B (BtB) to address the issues of clinical efficacy, effect size, and safety of BtB in the treatment of cervical dystonia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether botulinum toxin (BtB) is an effective and safe treatment for cervical dystonia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified studies for inclusion in the review using the Cochrane Movement Disorders Group trials register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE; and by handsearching the Movement Disorders Journal and abstracts of international congresses on movement disorders and botulinum toxin, by communication with other researchers in the field, by searching reference lists of papers found using the above search strategies, and by contacting authors and drug manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered studies eligible for inclusion in the review if they evaluated the efficacy of BtB for the treatment of cervical dystonia in randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a paper pro forma to collect data from the included studies with double extraction by two independent reviewers. Both reviewers assessed each trial for internal validity and settled differences by discussion. The outcome measures used included adverse events, improvement in symptomatic rating scales, subjective evaluation by patients and clinicians, changes in pain scores, changes in quality of life assessments.

MAIN RESULTS

Studies were short term (16 weeks) employing a single BtB injection session. All were multicentre and conducted in the US. All patients included had previously received BtA. The trials differed with respect to whether or not the patients were still responding to BtA but other entry criteria were similar. All studies used a dose of 10,000 Units of BtB in one group and the technique of administration was the same. Meta-analysis of three trials enrolling 308 participants showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) total score at week four with a Peto odds ratio (OR) for the number of patients who had at least a 20% improvement of 4.69 (95% CI 2.06 to 10.69) and a weighted mean difference of -5.92 (95% CI -9.61 to -2.23). Subjective rating scales (Patient Global Assessment of Change, Investigator Global Assessment of Change, and Patient Analog Pain Assessment) also improved. Adverse events clearly associated with the mechanism of action of BtB included dysphagia and dry mouth and the number of patients with any adverse event were more frequent in BtB treatment groups. Subgroup analyses showed a clear dose-response relationship for subjective and objective benefit, for frequency and severity of adverse events, and a greater benefit for BtA resistant patients than BtA responders in the primary outcome. The duration of effect was about 16 weeks. We found three eligible studies enrolling 308 participants. Studies were short term (16 weeks) employing a single BtB injection session. All were multicentre and conducted in the US. All patients included had previously received BtA. The trials differed with respect to whether or not the patients were still responding to BtA but other entry criteria were similar. Patient groups were appropriately selected and well matched. From the methodological point of view these trials were probably not subjected to important selection, performance or attrition bias and all studies used an intention-to-treat analysis.The dose varied significantly between studies although all used 10,000 Units of BtB in one group and the technique of administration was the same. The primary outcome in all trials was change in TWSTRS total score at week four and other efficacy outcomes were similar between studies. The number of dropouts was small and balanced in all trials. Reasons for withdrawals were given. One randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study was excluded because data couldn't be extracted for the outcomes. Meta-analysis showed statistically and clinically significant improvements with a Peto odds ratio (OR) of 20% in TWSTRS total score at week four (OR 4.69; 95% CI 2.06 to 10.69) and a weighted mean difference of -5.92 (95% CI -9.61 to -2.23). Subjective rating scales (Patient Global Assessment of Change, Investigator Global Assessment of Change, and Patient Analog Pain Assessment) also improved. The weighted mean difference for changes in these subjective scales varied between -13% to -21%. However, for many of the outcomes, we could not combine data from all studies. Only adverse events clearly associated with the mechanism of action of BtB were more frequent in the treatment group. These included dysphagia and dry mouth. The number of patients with any adverse event was more frequent with BtB. Subgroup analyses showed a clear dose-response relationship for subjective and objective benefit and for frequency and severity of adverse events. Subgroup analyses showed a greater benefit for the BtA resistant patients than BtA responders in the primary outcome. The duration of effect was about 16 weeks. These trials did not measure quality of life nor did they establish the long term duration of effect or immunogenicity

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A single injection of BtB was effective and safe for treating cervical dystonia. Long-term uncontrolled studies suggested that further injection cycles continue to work for most patients. Future research should explore technical factors such as the optimum treatment intervals and use of image or electromyographic guidance for administration. Other issues include service delivery, quality of life, long-term efficacy and safety, and the relative indications for BtA, BtB and other treatments such as deep brain stimulation.

摘要

背景

颈部肌张力障碍是局限性肌张力障碍最常见的形式。其特征为头部的不自主姿势,且常伴有颈部疼痛。残疾和社交退缩很常见。大多数颈部肌张力障碍病例是特发性的,通常是一种终身性疾病。近年来,A型肉毒毒素(BtA)已成为一线治疗方法。然而,一些患者对其产生了耐药性。这个问题促使人们研究另一种肉毒毒素(Bt)血清型,即B型肉毒毒素(BtB),以解决BtB治疗颈部肌张力障碍的临床疗效、效应大小和安全性问题。

目的

确定肉毒毒素(BtB)治疗颈部肌张力障碍是否有效且安全。

检索策略

我们通过Cochrane运动障碍组试验注册库、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE)来确定纳入综述的研究;通过手工检索《运动障碍杂志》以及运动障碍和肉毒毒素国际大会的摘要,与该领域的其他研究人员交流,检索使用上述检索策略找到的论文的参考文献列表,并联系作者和药品制造商。

选择标准

如果研究在随机、安慰剂对照试验中评估了BtB治疗颈部肌张力障碍的疗效,我们认为这些研究符合纳入综述的条件。

数据收集与分析

我们使用纸质表格从纳入的研究中收集数据,由两名独立的评审员进行双份提取。两名评审员评估每个试验的内部有效性,并通过讨论解决分歧。使用的结局指标包括不良事件、症状评分量表的改善情况、患者和临床医生的主观评估、疼痛评分的变化、生活质量评估的变化。

主要结果

研究为短期(16周),采用单次BtB注射疗程。所有研究均为多中心研究,在美国进行。所有纳入的患者此前均接受过BtA治疗。试验在患者是否仍对BtA有反应方面存在差异,但其他纳入标准相似。所有研究在一组中使用10000单位的BtB剂量,给药技术相同。对三项纳入308名参与者的试验进行的荟萃分析显示,在第4周时,多伦多西部痉挛性斜颈评分量表(TWSTRS)总分有统计学和临床意义的改善,至少有20%改善的患者的Peto比值比(OR)为4.69(95%可信区间2.06至10.69),加权平均差为 -5.92(95%可信区间 -9.61至 -2.23)。主观评分量表(患者总体变化评估、研究者总体变化评估和患者模拟疼痛评估)也有所改善。与BtB作用机制明确相关的不良事件包括吞咽困难和口干,且在BtB治疗组中发生任何不良事件 的患者数量更多。亚组分析显示,在主观和客观获益、不良事件的频率和严重程度方面存在明确的剂量反应关系,在主要结局中,对BtA耐药患者的获益大于对BtA有反应的患者。疗效持续时间约为周。我们发现三项符合条件的研究,共纳入308名参与者。研究为短期(16周),采用单次BtB注射疗程。所有研究均为多中心研究,在美国进行。所有纳入的患者此前均接受过BtA治疗。试验在患者是否仍对BtA有反应方面存在差异,但其他纳入标准相似。患者组选择恰当且匹配良好。从方法学角度来看,这些试验可能不存在重要的选择、实施或损耗偏倚,且所有研究均采用意向性分析。尽管所有研究在一组中都使用10000单位的BtB剂量且给药技术相同,但不同研究之间的剂量差异很大。所有试验的主要结局是第4周时TWSTRS总分的变化,其他疗效结局在各研究之间相似。所有试验中的退出人数较少且均衡。给出了退出原因。一项随机双盲安慰剂对照研究被排除,因为无法提取结局数据。荟萃分析显示有统计学和临床意义的改善,第4周时TWSTRS总分的Peto比值比(OR)为20%(OR 4.69;95%可信区间2.06至10.69),加权平均差为 -5.92(95%可信区间 -9.61至 -2.23)。主观评分量表(患者总体变化评估、研究者总体变化评估和患者模拟疼痛评估)也有所改善。这些主观量表变化的加权平均差在 -13%至 -21%之间。然而,对于许多结局,我们无法合并所有研究的数据。仅与BtB作用机制明确相关的不良事件在治疗组中更频繁。这些包括吞咽困难和口干。发生任何不良事件的患者数量在BtB组中更多。亚组分析显示,在主观和客观获益以及不良事件的频率和严重程度方面存在明确的剂量反应关系。亚组分析显示,在主要结局中,对BtA耐药患者的获益大于对BtA有反应的患者。疗效持续时间约为16周。这些试验未测量生活质量,也未确定长期疗效持续时间或免疫原性。

作者结论

单次注射BtB治疗颈部肌张力障碍有效且安全。长期非对照研究表明,对于大多数患者,进一步的注射周期仍有效果。未来的研究应探索技术因素,如最佳治疗间隔以及使用影像或肌电图引导进行给药。其他问题包括服务提供、生活质量、长期疗效和安全性,以及BtA、BtB和其他治疗方法(如深部脑刺激)的相对适应证。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验