Cost minimization analysis of BoNT-As in the treatment of upper limb spasticity and cervical dystonia

Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) injections are recommended for the management of upper limb spasticity (ULS) and cervical dystonia (CD). The main aim of this cost minimization analysis (CMA) was to compare the annual cost per patient for three BoNT-As (Botox®, Dysport® and Xeomin®) in the treatment of ULS or CD in Italy. A budget impact analysis (BIA) was also conducted. Methods The CMA was conducted from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Only direct medical costs (BoNT-A and standard therapy) were considered. By using a Delphi panel of twelve Italian Experts in the treatment of ULS and CD, data was collected about BoNT-As (dose, number of administrations and acquisition price) and standard therapy (concomitant medications, visits, Day-Hospital, hospitalizations, etc.). Costs were assessed in Euros 2014. The BIA was conducted to evaluate the pharmaceutical expenditure for the three BoNT-As on a five-year time horizon. A sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results The mean annual cost per patient with ULS was €1,840.20 with Dysport®, €2,067.12 with Botox® and €2,171.05 with Xeomin®. The mean annual cost per patient with CD was €1,353.79 with Dysport®, €1,433.12 with Botox® and €1,503.60 with Xeomin®. In the time horizon considered, the substitution process of Botox® and Xeomin® by Dysport® would result in a total saving of €620,000 when treating ULS and a total saving of €481,000 in the case of CD. Sensitivity and probabilistic analyses showed the robustness of results. Conclusions From the Italian National Health Service's perspective, Dysport® appears to be the cost-saving therapeutic option compared with Botox® and Xeomin® in the treatment of ULS or CD

Functional Movement Disorders during COVID-19: Psychological Distress, Affective Temperament and Emotional Dysregulation

Background and objective: Functional movement disorders (FMD) represent a spectrum of psychosomatic symptoms particularly sensitive to stress. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased psychological distress worldwide and may have worsened FMD. The study aimed to confirm this hypothesis and to test whether in FMD there is a relationship between affective temperament, emotional dysregulation and psychological distress due to the pandemic. Methods: We recruited individuals with FMD, diagnosed them according to validated criteria and matched them with healthy controls (HC). Psychological distress and temperament were obtained using the Kessler-10 and the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa and San Diego Autoquestionnaire, respectively. We used bootstrapped mediation analysis to test the mediator role of emotional dysregulation on the effect of temperament on psychological distress. Results: The sample consisted of 96 individuals. During the pandemic, 31.3% of the patients reported the need for urgent neurological care, and 40.6% reported a subjective worsening neurological condition. Patients with FMD presented with more psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic (F = 30.15, df = 1, p ≤ 0.001) than HC. They also reported more emotional dysregulation (F = 15.80, df = 1, p ≤ 0.001) and more cyclothymic traits (F = 14.84, df = 1, p ≤ 0.001). Cyclothymic temperament showed an indirect effect on COVID-19-related psychological distress, mediated by deficits in emotion regulation mechanisms (Bootstrapped LLCI = 0.41, ULCI = 2.41). Conclusion: Our results suggest that emotional dysregulation may represent a dimension mediating cyclotimic temperament response to the stressful effect of the pandemic and provide insight for developing intervention policies

Functional Movement Disorders during COVID-19: Psychological Distress, Affective Temperament and Emotional Dysregulation

Background and objective: Functional movement disorders (FMD) represent a spectrum of psychosomatic symptoms particularly sensitive to stress. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased psychological distress worldwide and may have worsened FMD. The study aimed to confirm this hypothesis and to test whether in FMD there is a relationship between affective temperament, emotional dysregulation and psychological distress due to the pandemic. Methods: We recruited individuals with FMD, diagnosed them according to validated criteria and matched them with healthy controls (HC). Psychological distress and temperament were obtained using the Kessler-10 and the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa and San Diego Autoquestionnaire, respectively. We used bootstrapped mediation analysis to test the mediator role of emotional dysregulation on the effect of temperament on psychological distress. Results: The sample consisted of 96 individuals. During the pandemic, 31.3% of the patients reported the need for urgent neurological care, and 40.6% reported a subjective worsening neurological condition. Patients with FMD presented with more psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic (F = 30.15, df = 1, p <= 0.001) than HC. They also reported more emotional dysregulation (F = 15.80, df = 1, p <= 0.001) and more cyclothymic traits (F = 14.84, df = 1, p <= 0.001). Cyclothymic temperament showed an indirect effect on COVID-19-related psychological distress, mediated by deficits in emotion regulation mechanisms (Bootstrapped LLCI = 0.41, ULCI = 2.41). Conclusion: Our results suggest that emotional dysregulation may represent a dimension mediating cyclotimic temperament response to the stressful effect of the pandemic and provide insight for developing intervention policies

Efficacy and safety of long-term botulinum toxin treatment for acquired cervical dystonia: a 25-year follow-up

Botulinum toxin A (BoNT/A) is the first-line treatment for idiopathic cervical dystonia (ICD) and is widely used in the clinical setting. To date, scanty data are available on the effectiveness of BoNT in treating acquired cervical dystonia (ACD). Here we present a long-term follow-up of ACD patients treated with BoNT/A that focused on safety and efficacy. The study included subjects who had received at least six treatments of three commercially available BoNT/A drugs [abobotulinumtoxinA (A/Abo), incobotulinumtoxinA (A/Inco) and onabotulinumtoxinA (A/Ona)]. Safety and efficacy were assessed based on patients' self-reports regarding adverse effects (AE), duration of improvement of dystonia and/or pain relief. Global clinical improvement was measured on a six-point scale. 23 patients with ACD were administered 739 treatments (A/Abo in 235, A/Inco in 72, A/Ona in 432) with a mean number of treatments of 31 +/- 20 (range 6-76) and duration of 10 +/- 6 weeks (range 2-25). The mean dose was 737 +/- 292 U for A/Abo, 138 +/- 108 U for A/Inco and 158 +/- 80 U for A/Ona. The average benefit duration was 89 +/- 26 (A/Abo), 88 +/- 30 days (A/Inco), and 99 +/- 55 days (A/Ona) (p = 0.011); global clinical improvement for all sessions was 4 +/- 1. ANOVA one-way analysis indicated that A/Ona had the best profile in terms of duration (p < 0.05), whereas A/Abo had the best pain relief effect (p = 0.002). Side effects were reported in 9% of treatments (67/739), with ten treatments (1%) complicated by two side effects. Most side effects were rated mild to moderate; severe side effects occurred following three treatments with the three different BoNT; two required medical intervention. No allergic reactions were reported. Even after 25 years of repeated treatments, all serotypes of BoNT demonstrate positive effects in treating ACD with long-lasting efficacy and safety