Analgesic potential of different available commercial brands of botulinum neurotoxin-A in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice

IF 3.6 Q2 TOXICOLOGY Toxicon: X Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.toxcx.2021.100083
Thays Crosara Abrahão Cunha , Ana Claudia Gontijo Couto , Eduardo Januzzi , Rafael Tardin Rosa Ferraz Gonçalves , Graziella Silva , Cassia Regina Silva
{"title":"Analgesic potential of different available commercial brands of botulinum neurotoxin-A in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice","authors":"Thays Crosara Abrahão Cunha ,&nbsp;Ana Claudia Gontijo Couto ,&nbsp;Eduardo Januzzi ,&nbsp;Rafael Tardin Rosa Ferraz Gonçalves ,&nbsp;Graziella Silva ,&nbsp;Cassia Regina Silva","doi":"10.1016/j.toxcx.2021.100083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The use of botulinum neurotoxin-A (BoNT-A) is an alternative for the management of orofacial pain disorders. Although only Botox has labeled, there are other commercial brands available for use, among them: Dysport, Botulift, Prosigne, and Xeomin. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the possible differences in the antinociceptive effect evoked by different commercially available formulations of BoNT-A in an animal model of inflammatory orofacial pain induced by formalin injection. Male C57/BL6 mice (20–25 g) were submitted to the pre-treatment with five different commercial brands of BoNT-A (Botox, Botulift, Xeomin, Dysport, or Prosigne; with doses between 0.02 and 0.2 Units of Botulinum Toxin, in 20 μL of 0.9% saline) three days prior the 2% formalin injection. All injections were made subcutaneously into the right perinasal area. After formalin injections, nociceptive behaviors like rubbing the place of injection were quantified during the neurogenic (0–5 min) and inflammatory (15–30 min) phases. The treatment using Botox, Botulift, and Xeomin were able to induce antinociceptive effects in both phases of the formalin-induced pain animal model, however, Dysport and Prosigne reduced the response in neither of them. Our data suggest that the treatment using different formulations of BoNT-A is not similar in efficacy as analgesics when evaluated in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37124,"journal":{"name":"Toxicon: X","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.toxcx.2021.100083","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicon: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590171021000199","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of botulinum neurotoxin-A (BoNT-A) is an alternative for the management of orofacial pain disorders. Although only Botox has labeled, there are other commercial brands available for use, among them: Dysport, Botulift, Prosigne, and Xeomin. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the possible differences in the antinociceptive effect evoked by different commercially available formulations of BoNT-A in an animal model of inflammatory orofacial pain induced by formalin injection. Male C57/BL6 mice (20–25 g) were submitted to the pre-treatment with five different commercial brands of BoNT-A (Botox, Botulift, Xeomin, Dysport, or Prosigne; with doses between 0.02 and 0.2 Units of Botulinum Toxin, in 20 μL of 0.9% saline) three days prior the 2% formalin injection. All injections were made subcutaneously into the right perinasal area. After formalin injections, nociceptive behaviors like rubbing the place of injection were quantified during the neurogenic (0–5 min) and inflammatory (15–30 min) phases. The treatment using Botox, Botulift, and Xeomin were able to induce antinociceptive effects in both phases of the formalin-induced pain animal model, however, Dysport and Prosigne reduced the response in neither of them. Our data suggest that the treatment using different formulations of BoNT-A is not similar in efficacy as analgesics when evaluated in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同商业品牌肉毒杆菌神经毒素a对福尔马林引起的小鼠口面部疼痛的镇痛潜力
肉毒杆菌神经毒素- a (BoNT-A)的使用是治疗口腔面部疼痛疾病的一种替代方法。虽然只有肉毒杆菌贴了标签,但也有其他商业品牌可供使用,其中包括:Dysport、Botulift、Prosigne和Xeomin。本研究的目的是评估不同市售BoNT-A配方在福尔马林注射引起的炎症性口面部疼痛动物模型中所引起的抗痛感效果的可能差异。雄性C57/BL6小鼠(20-25 g)使用5种不同商业品牌的BoNT-A (Botox、Botulift、Xeomin、Dysport或Prosigne)进行预处理;注射2%福尔马林前3天,在20 μL 0.9%生理盐水中注射0.02 ~ 0.2单位肉毒毒素。所有注射均在右阴部皮下进行。注射福尔马林后,在神经原性(0-5 min)和炎症期(15-30 min),量化摩擦注射部位等伤害性行为。使用肉毒杆菌素、Botulift和Xeomin治疗能够在福尔马林诱导的疼痛动物模型的两个阶段诱导抗伤感受作用,然而,Dysport和Prosigne都没有降低这两个阶段的反应。我们的数据表明,当评估福尔马林诱导的小鼠口腔面部疼痛时,使用不同配方的BoNT-A的治疗效果与镇痛药不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Toxicon: X
Toxicon: X Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Toxicology
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Stress levels, hematological condition, and productivity of plasma-producing horses used for snake antivenom manufacture: A comparison of two industrial bleeding methods Diagnosis of human envenoming by terrestrial venomous animals: Routine, advances, and perspectives Supplementation of polyclonal antibodies, developed against epitope-string toxin-specific peptide immunogens, to commercial polyvalent antivenom, shows improved neutralization of Indian Big Four and Naja kaouthia snake venoms Bioprospection of rattlesnake venom peptide fractions with anti-adipose and anti-insulin resistance activity in vitro A probabilistic hazard assessment for cyanobacterial toxins accounting for regional geography and water body trophic status
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1