The three different botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A) preparations being licensed in Europe and the U.S. differ in protein content, which seems to be a major factor influencing the antigenicity of BoNT/A. In the present study, several arguments out of our research pool were collected to demonstrate that the clinical response and antigenicity were different for the three BoNT/A preparations: some results of (1) a cross-sectional study on clinical outcome and antibody formation of 212 patients with cervical dystonia (CD) being treated between 2 and 22 years; 2) another cross-sectional study on the clinical aspects and neutralizing antibody (NAB) induction of 63 patients having developed partial secondary treatment under abobotulinum (aboBoNT/A) onabotulinumtoxin (onaBoNT/A) who were switched to incobotulinumtoxin (incoBoNT/A) in comparison to 32 patients being exclusively treated with incoBoNT/A. These results imply that (1) the presence of NAB cannot be concluded from the course of treatment, that (2) an increase in the dose and variability of outcome with treatment duration indicates the ongoing induction of NABs over time, that (3) the higher protein load of BoNT/A goes along with a higher incidence and prevalence of NAB induction and that (4) the best response to a BoNT/A is also dependent on the protein load of the preparation.

Background Among the spectrum of licensed botulinum neurotoxin preparations incobotulinumtoxin (incoBoNT/A; Xeomin®) is the only one which does not contain complex proteins. Therefore, incoBoNT/A has been suggested to have a low antigenicity, but precise estimations on incidence and prevalence of neutralizing antibody formation during long-term treatment are outstanding so far. Methods For the present cross-sectional study, 59 patients having exclusively been treated with incoBoNT/A (mono group) and 32 patients having been treated with other BoNT/A preparations less than nine times and who were then switched to at least 14 sessions of incoBoNT/A treatment (switch group) were recruited from one botulinum toxin outpatient clinic. Side effects and doses were extracted from the charts, and the efficacy of treatment was assessed by the patients using a visual analogue scale (0-100). The prevalence of neutralizing antibodies was tested by means of the mouse hemi-diaphragm assay (MHDA). Findings None of the patients in the mono and only two in the switch group had a positive MHDA-test. Across all indications and patients, mean improvement exceeded 67%. Improvement did not depend on age at onset, sex, change of dose or duration of treatment, but on disease entity. In patients with cervical dystonia, improvement was about the same in the mono and switch subgroup, but the last dose was different. Conclusions The present study confirms the low antigenicity of incoBoNT/A, which has immediate consequences for patient management, and the use of higher doses and shorter durations of reinjection intervals in botulinum toxin therapy.

Background For many indications, BoNT/A is repetitively injected with the risk of developing neutralizing antibodies (NABs). Therefore, it is important to analyze whether there is a difference in antigenicity between the different licensed BoNT/A preparations. Methods In this cross-sectional study, the prevalence of NABs was tested by means of the sensitive mouse hemidiaphragm assay (MHDA) in 645 patients. Patients were split into those having exclusively been treated with the complex protein-free incoBoNT/A preparation (CF-MON group) and those having started BoNT/A therapy with a complex protein-containing BoNT/A preparation (CC-I group). This CC-I group was split into those patients who remained either on abo- or onaBoNT/A (CC-MON group) and those who had been treated with at least two BoNT/A preparations (CC-SWI group). To balance treatment duration, only CC-MON patients who did not start their BoNT/A therapy more than 10 years before recruitment (CC-MON-10 group) were further analyzed. The log-rank test was used to compare the prevalence of NABs in the CF-MON and CC-MON-10 group. Results In the CF-MON subgroup, no patient developed NABs. In the CC-I group, 84 patients were NAB-positive. NABs were found in 33.3% of those who switched preparations (CC-SWI) and in 5.9% of the CC-MON-10 group. Kaplan–Meier curves for remaining NAB-negative under continuous BoNT/A therapy were significantly different (p < 0.035) between the CF-MON and CC-MON-10 group. Conclusion Frequent injections of a complex protein-containing BoNT/A preparation are associated with significantly higher risks of developing NABs than injections with the same frequency using the complex protein-free incoBoNT/A preparation.

Under continuous long-term treatment with abo- or onabotulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A), ~10 to 15% of patients with cervical dystonia (CD) will develop neutralizing antibodies and reduced responsiveness over an ~10-year treatment period. Among the botulinum neurotoxin type A preparations so far licensed for CD, incobotulinum toxin A (incoBoNT/A; Xeomin®) is the only one without complex proteins. Whether CD patients with treatment failure under abo- or onaBoNT/A may still respond to incoBoNT/A is unknown. In this cross-sectional, retrospective study, 64 CD patients with secondary treatment failure after abo- or onaBoNT/A therapy who were switched to incoBoNT/A were compared to 34 CD patients exclusively treated with incoBoNT/A. The initial clinical severity of CD, best outcome during abo- or onaBoNT/A therapy, severity at the time of switching to incoBoNT/A and severity at recruitment, as well as all corresponding doses, were analyzed. Furthermore, the impact of neutralizing antibodies (NABs) on the long-term outcome of incoBoNT/A therapy was evaluated. Patients significantly improved after the switch to incoBoNT/A (p < 0.001) but did not reach the improvement level obtained before the development of partial secondary treatment failure or that of patients who were exclusively treated with incoBoNT/A. No difference between abo- and onaBoNT/A pretreatments or between the long-term outcomes of NAB-positive and NAB-negative patients was found. The present study demonstrates significant long-term improvement after a switch to incoBoNT/A in patients with preceding secondary treatment failure after abo- or onaBoNT/A therapy and confirms the low antigenicity of incoBoNT/A.