Safety and efficacy of NeuroBloc (botulinum toxin type B) in type A-resistant cervical dystonia. Safety and efficacy of NeuroBloc (botulinum toxin type B) in type A-responsive cervical dystonia. Effect of botulinum toxin in the treatment of drooling: a controlled clinical trial. Intra-articular botulinum toxin A for refractory shoulder pain: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Evaluating the accuracy of a simple heuristic to identify serious causes of low back pain. Active exercise, education, and cognitive behavioral therapy for persistent disabling low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Beyond Medline: reducing bias through extended systematic review search. Evolution of the randomized controlled trial in oncology over three decades. A pragmatic, unblinded randomised controlled trial comparing an occupational therapy-led lifestyle approach and routine GP care for panic disorder treatment in primary care.
To determine the safety and efficacy of botulinum toxin type B (BoNT/B) in patients with type A-resistant cervical dystonia (CD).
                Local intramuscular injections of BoNT are an effective therapy for CD. After repeated use, some patients become resistant to therapy. BoNT/B, effective in type A toxin-responsive patients, is proposed as an alternative therapy for type A-resistant patients.
                The authors performed a 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of BoNT/B in type A-resistant patients with CD. After resistance to therapy was confirmed with the frontalis-type A test, placebo or 10,000 U BoNT/B was administered in a single session into two to four clinically involved muscles. The Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) was the primary efficacy measurement. TWSTRS-Total, three visual analog scales (Patient Global Assessment of Change, Principal Investigator Global Assessment of Change, Patient Analog Pain Assessment), and adverse events were assessed at baseline and weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16.
                A total of 77 patients participated (38 placebo, 39 active). Improvements in severity, disability, and pain were documented in the BoNT/B-treated group. TWSTRS-Total scores were improved in the BoNT/B-treated group at weeks 4 (p = 0.0001), 8 (p = 0.0002), and 12 (p = 0.0129). All three visual analog scales demonstrated improvements at week 4 (p < 0.0001, 0.0001, and 0.001). A Kaplan-Meier analysis supported a duration of effect of 12 to 16 weeks in the active group. Dry mouth and dysphagia were self-limited adverse effects, reported more commonly in the BoNT/B group.
                Botulinum toxin type B (BoNT/B) (NeuroBloc) is safe and efficacious for the management of patients with type A-resistant cervical dystonia with an estimated duration of treatment effect of 12 to 16 weeks. To determine the safety and efficacy of botulinum toxin type B (BoNT/B) in patients with cervical dystonia (CD).
                BoNT/B is a form of chemodenervation therapy for the treatment of patients with CD.
                The authors performed a 16-week, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of BoNT/B in patients with CD who continue to respond to botulinum toxin type A. Placebo, or 5,000 U or 10,000 U of BoNT/B was administered in two to four muscles involved clinically in CD. The Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS)-Total score at week 4 was the primary efficacy measure. Clinical assessments and adverse events were recorded for treatment day 1 and at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16.
                A total of 109 patients were enrolled randomly across all three treatment groups. The mean improvement in the TWSTRS-Total scores in each group at week 4 was 4.3 (placebo), 9.3 (5,000 U), and 11.7 (10,000 U). For the prospectively defined primary contrast (10,000 U versus placebo), highly significant differences were noted for the primary (TWSTRS-Total, baseline to week 4, p = 0.0004) and supportive secondary (Patient Global Assessment, baseline to week 4, p = 0.0001) outcome measures. Improvement in pain, disability, and severity of CD occurred for patients who were treated with BoNT/B when compared with placebo-treated patients. Overall, improvements associated with BoNT/B treatment were greatest for patients who received the 10,000-U dose. The duration of treatment effect for BoNT/B was 12 to 16 weeks for both doses.
                Botulinum toxin type B (NeuroBloc) is safe and efficacious at 5,000 U and 10,000 U for the management of patients with cervical dystonia. To investigate the clinical effectiveness of botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT) to reduce drooling in children with cerebral palsy (CP).
                A controlled clinical trial was performed in which the results of single-dose BoNT injections in the submandibular glands were compared with treatment with scopolamine. Forty-five children who had CP and experienced severe drooling were enrolled. Drooling severity was measured at baseline, during application of scopolamine, and at different intervals after BoNT injections up to 24 weeks, using the Drooling Quotient (DQ), the Teacher Drooling Scale (TDS), and Visual Analog Scales (VAS).
                Drooling was reduced during scopolamine application as well as after BoNT injections. Compared with baseline, the mean DQ showed a significant decrease throughout the study. Greatest reductions were achieved 2 to 8 weeks after BoNT injection. No significant differences were found between scopolamine measurements and those up to 24 months after BoNT injection. Using VAS, parents recorded the effect on drooling in which significant differences were found between baseline VAS score and all follow-up assessments. According to our definition of "success to therapy," demanding a 2-point decrease on the TDS, 61.5% of patients responded to BoNT injections. Analysis of the DQ demonstrated a response rate of 53% of the patients to scopolamine and 48.7% to BoNT until 24 weeks after BoNT injections, the actual duration of this study. As a reaction to scopolamine, 71.1% of the patients had moderate to severe side effects. Only nonsevere, incidental side effects were reported after BoNT injections.
                During scopolamine application as well as after intraglandular BoNT injections, a clinically relevant reduction in drooling was achieved in children with CP, demonstrating maximum effect 2 to 8 weeks after injections. This is the first controlled clinical trial that confirmed a significant effect of BoNT injections in the treatment of drooling. General anesthesia was needed for all children. BoNT injections show fewer and less serious side effects than transdermal scopolamine treatment. We compared the short-term efficacy and safety of intra-articular (IA) botulinum toxin A (BoNT/A) to IA-placebo in patients with chronic, refractory shoulder joint pain. Forty-three shoulder joints in patients with moderate-to-severe shoulder arthritis pain were randomized to receive (1) 100 units IA-BoNT/A + lidocaine or (2) IA-saline + lidocaine. The following outcomes were compared using analysis of covariance: (1) primary: change in pain severity on a visual analog scale at 1 month (VAS, 0 cm to 10 cm); (2) secondary: Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) disability subscale, quality of life on short-form (SF)-36 subscales, percent of patients who achieved at least a 30% decrease or a 2-point reduction in VAS pain (clinically meaningful pain relief), and safety. Both BoNT/A (n = 21) and placebo (n = 22) groups were comparable at baseline. At 1 month post-injection, the VAS pain reduction was significantly more in the BoNT/A group versus the placebo group (-2.4 vs -0.8; P-value = 0.014). When comparing BoNT/A with the placebo group at 1 month, it was observed that 5 SF-36 subscale scores improved significantly (P </= 0.035), and the SPADI disability improved more with a trend toward significance (51.5 +/- 4.4 vs 64.9 +/- 3.9; P = 0.083). In addition, clinically meaningful pain relief occurred in 61% versus 36% patients (P = 0.22). The total number of adverse events was similar, which included 50 events in the BoNT/A group versus 46 events in the placebo group. A single injection of BoNT/A produced statistically significant and clinically meaningful pain relief and improvement in quality of life in patients with chronic refractory moderate/severe shoulder arthritis pain at 1 month. These data provide evidence to support the efficacy of this novel neurotoxin therapy that needs to be confirmed in a multicenter, randomized trial. Among patients presenting with low back pain (LBP), GPs have to identify those with serious, treatable conditions. However, excluding these conditions in every patient with LPB is time consuming and of low yield. We have suggested that identifying those patients where these serious conditions need to be considered can be made more efficient through asking patient if they feel their LBP is new or unfamiliar in some way.
                To evaluate the diagnostic validity of a simple heuristic based on the patient's view of the familiarity of LBP.
                Cross-sectional diagnostic study with delayed-type reference standard, nested within a three-arm randomized trial of quality improvement for LBP. A total of 1378 patients presenting, with LBP, to one of 126 participating GPs were included. They were asked whether their LBP was familiar or not (index test). At 1 year, patients were interviewed with regard to relevant conditions that in hindsight might explain their LBP. Reviewers deciding on disease status (reference standard) were blinded to the results of the index test.
                Totally 1190 patients answered the index test question and were available for interview at 1 year. Only four of these had a serious cause of their LBP. Two of these were identified by the familiarity heuristic, resulting in low sensitivity.
                The number of diseased patients was too small to obtain a reliable estimate of sensitivity. Low prevalence of serious disease in primary care poses difficulties for diagnostic research. In hindsight we would question whether an RCT-setting emphasizing non-specific LBP is suitable for this kind of research. At present, the familiarity heuristic cannot be recommended for patients presenting with LBP. A randomized controlled trial.
                To determine 1) whether, among patients with persistent disabling low back pain (LBP), a group program of exercise and education using a cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) approach, reduces pain and disability over a subsequent 12-month period; 2) the cost-effectiveness of the intervention; and 3) whether a priori preference for type of treatment influences outcome.
                There is evidence that both exercise and CBT delivered in specialist settings is effective in improving LBP. There is a lack of evidence on whether such interventions, delivered by trained individuals in primary care, result in improved outcomes.
                The study was conducted in nine family medical practices in East Cheshire, UK. Patients 18 to 65 years of age, consulting with LBP, were recruited; those still reporting LBP 3 months after the initial consultation were randomized between the two trial arms. The intervention arm received a program of eight 2-hour group exercise session over 6 weeks comprising active exercise and education delivered by physiotherapists using a CBT approach. Both arms received an educational booklet and audio-cassette. The primary outcome measures were pain (0-100 Visual Analogue Scale) and disability (Roland and Morris Disability Scale; score 0-24).
                A total of 196 subjects (84%) completed follow-up 12 months after the completion of the intervention program. The intervention showed only a small and nonsignificant effect at reducing pain (-3.6 mm; 95% confidence interval, -8.5, 1.2 mm) and disability (-0.6 score; 95% confidence interval, -1.6, 0.4). The cost of the intervention was low with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of pound5000 (U.S. $8650) per quality adjusted life year. In addition, patients allocated to the intervention that had expressed a preference for it had clinically important reductions in pain and disability.
                This intervention program produces only modest effects in reducing LBP and disability over a 1-year period. The observation that patient preference for treatment influences outcome warrants further investigation. To evaluate the sensitivity and precision of various extended search methods in identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for systematic reviews.
                Prospective analysis of extended search methods (specialized databases or trial registries, reference lists, hand-searching, personal communication, and Internet) used in two systematic reviews of RCTs. The gold standard was the total number of RCTs identified by major databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, etc.) and extended search strategies combined. Sensitivity was the proportion of all known RCTs identified by any extended search method. Precision reflected the proportion of all items uncovered by any extended search method that actually were RCTs.
                The extended search identified 94 additional RCTs for the systematic reviews beyond those identified with the major databases. Specialized databases and trial registries had the highest sensitivity and precision for the lipid-lowering project (13.6% and 52.7%, respectively; p < .05) followed by scanning of reference lists (7.2% sensitivity and 41.9% precision; p <.05). Hand-searching was more effective than personal communication and Internet searching (1.7% sensitivity and 12.2% precision; p < .05). The acupuncture project had slightly different results, with the specialized databases and trial registries tied with the review of reference lists for highest sensitivity (14.2%). The precision followed the same trend as the lipid-lowering project (17.6% specialized databases; 8.3% reference lists; p < .05). A post-hoc analysis showed that 75 of the 94 RCTs were indexed in the major databases but missed by the major database search.
                Extended searching identified additional RCTs for the systematic reviews beyond those found in major databases. Specialized databases and trial registries were most effective. An important number of RCTs were missed by the major database search. Timing and accuracy of indexing may explain this finding. The definitive measure, whether there is an association between the method used to uncover RCTs, the quality of the items uncovered and their impact on systematic review results, is yet to be determined. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the gold standard for establishing new therapies in clinical oncology. Here we document changes with time in design, sponsorship, and outcomes of oncology RCTs.
                Reports of RCTs evaluating systemic therapy for breast, colorectal (CRC), and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) published 1975 to 2004 in six major journals were reviewed. Two authors abstracted data regarding trial design, results, and conclusions. Conclusions of authors were graded using a 7-point Likert scale. For each study the effect size for the primary end point was converted to a summary measure.
                A total of 321 eligible RCTs were included (48% breast, 24% CRC, 28% NSCLC). Over time, the number and size of RCTs increased considerably. For-profit/mixed sponsorship increased substantially during the study period (4% to 57%; P < .001). There was increasing use of time-to-event measures (39% to 78%) and decreasing use of response rate (54% to 14%) as primary end point (P < .001). Effect size remained stable over the study period. Authors have become more likely to strongly endorse the experimental arm (P = .017). A significant P value for the primary end point and industry sponsorship were each independently associated with endorsement of the experimental agent (odds ratio [OR] = 19.6, 95% CI, 8.9 to 43.1, and OR = 3.5, 95% CI, 1.6 to 7.5, respectively).
                RCTs in oncology have become larger and are more likely to be sponsored by industry. Authors of modern RCTs are more likely to strongly endorse novel therapies. For-profit sponsorship and statistically significant results are independently associated with endorsement of the experimental arm. Treated anxiety increased in the UK by over 30% since 1994. Medication and psychological treatment is most common, but outcomes are sometimes poor, with high relapse rates. Lifestyle has a potential role in treatment, but is not considered in clinical guidelines. Panic disorder is potentially influenced by lifestyle factors.
                16 week unblinded pragmatic randomised controlled trial in 15 East of England primary care practices (2 Primary Care Trusts). Participants met DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder with/without agoraphobia. Follow-up at 20 weeks and 10 months. Control arm, unrestricted routine GP care. Trial Arm, Occupational therapy-led lifestyle treatment comprising: lifestyle review of fluid intake, diet pattern, exercise, caffeine, alcohol and nicotine; negotiation of positive lifestyle changes; monitoring and review of impact of changes. Primary outcome measure: Beck Anxiety Inventory.
                Intention-to-treat analysis provided between-group comparisons using analysis of co-variance. Bonferroni method to adjust p-values.
                From 199 referrals, 36 GP care and 31 lifestyle arm patients completed to final follow-up. Significantly lower lifestyle arm BAI scores at 20 weeks (p<0.001), non-significant (p=0.167) at 10 months after Bonferroni correction. 63.6% lifestyle arm, and 40% GP arm patients (p=0.045) panic-free at 20 weeks; 67.7% and 48.5% (p=0.123) respectively at 10 months.
                Final study size/power calls for caution in interpreting findings.
                A lifestyle approach may provide a clinically effective intervention at least as effective as routine GP care, with significant improvements in anxiety compared with routine GP care at the end of treatment. Further study is required before suggesting practice changes.
We identified three studies that investigated the merits of BoNT for LBP, but only one had a low risk of bias and evaluated patients with non-specific LBP (N = 31). Further research is very likely to have an important impact on the estimate of effect and our confidence in it. Future trials should standardize patient populations, treatment protocols and comparison groups, enlist more participants and include long-term outcomes, cost-benefit analysis and clinical relevance of findings.