Skip to main content

Table 1 Completed Trials for Sialorrhea

From: RimabotulinumtoxinB in sialorrhea: systematic review of clinical trials

Study Design/Duration Objective N Patient Population Intervention Glands injected Efficacy Outcomes Safety Outcomes
Chinnapongse R, et al; 2012 [24] Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, sequential-dose escalation design Evaluate safety, tolerability and efficacy of three BoNT-B doses subjects with sialorrhea N = 54 PD subjects with troublesome sialorrhea BoNT-B doses:
1500 units; 2500 units; or 3500 units or placebo
PG and SMG 4 weeks post injection-significant improvement in DFSS and USFR. placebo
(p ≤ 0.0009)
No serious AEs attributed to BoNT-B
Guidubaldi A, et al; 2011 [25] Prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover pilot study Evaluate efficacy and tolerability of BoNT-A versus BoNT-B for the treatment of sialorrhea N = 27 Patients with ALS or PD
(n = 15 ALS; n = 12 PD) enrolled,
250 units BoNT-A
2500 units BoNT-B
Ultrasound-guided injections into parotid and submandibular glands performed
B/L PG and SMG Subjective and objective improvements in all patients
Shorter latency to response with BoNT-B Similar mean benefit duration similar
Only toxin-related side effect was a change in saliva thickness
Jackson CE, et all; 2009 [26] Double-blind, randomized study Determine patient perception of benefit of BoNT-B treatment for sialorrhea in ALS patients N = 20 ALS patients with sialorrhea refractory to medical therapy 2500 units of BoNT-B B/L PG and SMG Global impression of improvement of 82% at 2 weeks vs. 38% placebo group (p < 0.05)
Significant effect sustained at 4 weeks, with continued improvement at 12 wees (in 50% of patients)
No significant AEs (including dysphagia) reported
Ondo, et al; 2004 [27] Double-blind placebo-controlled Determine whether BoNT-B is safe and effective for sialorrhea in patients with PD N = 16 PD subjects with problematic sialorrhea 1000 units BoNT-B into each parotid gland and 250 units into each submandibular gland) or placebo PG and SMG Improvement on the Visual Analogue Scale,global impressions of change, Drooling Rating Scale and DSFS in BoNT-B Adverse events were considered mild
Lagalla G, et al; 2009 [28] Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study Investigate safety, efficacy and effectiveness of BoNT-B into the parotid glands to reduce drooling in PD subjects N = 36 Advanced phase PD subjects who complained of disabling drooling 4000 units BoNT-B or placebo PG BTX-B patients showed a significant improvement in almost all subjective outcomes
All BTX-B subjects reported sialorrhea reduction (moderate in 44.4%, and marked in 33.3%), vs 61.1% controls who denied benefit Benefits lasted on average 19.2 +/- 6.3 weeks in the BTX-B)
Three BoNT-B patients complained of mild, transient
swallowing difficulties starting 10 days after the injections and recovering within 2 weeks
One BoNT-B patient showed a transient mild weakness of chewing.
Steinlechner, et al; 2010 [29] Double-blind placebo-controlled
Patients were followed over 16 weeks
To evaluate the treatment effects, tolerance, and duration of BoNT-B in neuroleptic-induced (group 1) and PD-associated sialorrhea (group 2) N = 9 Group 1: 4 patients
Group 2: 5 patients
2500 units BoNT-B) injected under ultrasound control PG and SMG “Large effect sizes* for improvement of sialorrhea” in patients treated with BoNT-B compared to placebo. Reduction of sialorrhea lasted for 8 to 16 weeks after a single injection. No patient reported side effects.
  1. AE adverse event, ALS amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, B/L bilateral, BoNT-A abotulinumtoxinA, BoNT-B botulinum neurotoxin type B (rimabotulinumtoxinB), DSFS Drooling Severity and Frequency Scale, GI gastrointestinal, PD Parkinson’s disease, PG parotid gland, SMG submandibular gland, UPDRS Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, VAS-FD visual-analogic ratings of familial distress, VAS-SD social distress. * Effect size estimates of key measures as a descriptive approach using Cohen's d procedure were applied to measure the magnitude of the treatment effect. Notably, these estimates are independent of sample size unlike significance tests. Small effect size of ≥0.2 and <0.5. Medium effect size of ≥0.5 and <0.8. *Large effect size of ≥0.8. Positive effect sizes implying a decrease of test value from T0 to T1, whereas negative effect sizes implying an increase of test value from T0 to T1, respectively