Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26123825›Full record

ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2015

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for acute treatment of high-frequency and chronic migraine: an open-label study.

Piero Barbanti, Licia Grazzi, Gabriella Egeo, Anna Maria Padovan, Eric Liebler, Gennaro Bussone

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07593365 (Clinical Application of Vagus Nerve Stimulation Combined With Immunoregulatory T Cells in Alleviating Aromatase Inhibitor-Induced Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 82 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07593365 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Application of Vagus Nerve Stimulation Combined With Immunoregulatory T Cells in Alleviating Aromatase Inhibitor-Induced Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorPeking University People's HospitalRan2026 to 2029Enrolled216ConditionsAromatase Inhibitor Associated Musculoskeletal Symptoms (AIMSS), Breast Cancer, Pain AlleviationArmstranscutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation, sham stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

82 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Non-Invasive Neuromodulation in the Treatment of Headache.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Interventional neuromodulation techniques for cervicogenic headache.Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Piero BarbantiHeadache and Pain Unit, Department of Neurological Motor and Sensorial Sciences, IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana, Via della Pisana 235, 00163, Rome, Italy, piero.barbanti@sanraffaele.it.
Licia Grazzi
Gabriella Egeo
Anna Maria Padovan
Eric Liebler
Gennaro Bussone
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta · ITIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico San Raffaele

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe treatment of migraine headache is challenging given the lack of a standardized approach to care, unsatisfactory response rates, and medication overuse. Neuromodulation therapy has gained interest as an alternative to pharmacologic therapy for primary headache disorders. This study investigated the effects of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) in patients with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and chronic migraine (CM).

findingsIn this open-label, single-arm, multicenter study, patients with HFEM or CM self-treated up to 3 consecutive mild or moderate migraine attacks that occurred during a 2-week period by delivering two 120-s doses of nVNS at 3-min intervals to the right cervical branch of the vagus nerve. Of the 50 migraineurs enrolled (CM/HFEM: 36/14), 48 treated 131 attacks. The proportion of patients reporting pain relief, defined as a ≥50% reduction in visual analog scale (VAS) score, was 56.3% at 1 h and 64.6% at 2 h. Of these patients, 35.4% and 39.6% achieved pain-free status (VAS = 0) at 1 and 2 h, respectively. When all attacks (N = 131) were considered, the pain-relief rate was 38.2% at 1 h and 51.1% at 2 h, whereas the pain-free rate was 17.6% at 1 h and 22.9% at 2 h. Treatment with nVNS was safe and well tolerated.

conclusionNon-invasive vagus nerve stimulation may be effective as acute treatment for HFEM or CM and may help to reduce medication overuse and medication-associated adverse events.

Indexed as

AdultChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMigraine DisordersPain MeasurementTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVagus Nerve Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID26123825
PMCPMC4485661
OpenAlexW1801874439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.