Trial reportHeadache2020
A Randomized Trial to Evaluate OnabotulinumtoxinA for Prevention of Headaches in Adolescents With Chronic Migraine.
Trial report in Headache, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and safety of pharmacological prophylaxis for chronic migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Onabotulinumtoxina in the Prevention of Migraine in Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review.Toxins · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Safety of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Adolescent Patients with Chronic Migraine.Toxins · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of atogepant for the prophylactic treatment of migraine: evidence from randomized controlled trials.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Pooled it
- Botox (OnabotulinumtoxinA) for Treatment of Migraine Symptoms: A Systematic Review.Pain research & management · 2022Pooled it
- Safety and Efficacy of Fremanezumab for the Prevention of Migraine: A Meta-Analysis From Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Pooled it
- Review
- Review
- Beyond the Guidelines: A Narrative Review of Treatments on the Horizon for Migraine in Children and Adolescents.Neurology · 2023Review
- Real Life Data on OnabotulinumtoxinA for Treatment of Chronic Migraine in Pediatric Age.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Emerging Pharmacological Treatments for Migraine in the Pediatric Population.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Management of Chronic Migraine in Children and Adolescents: Where are We in 2022?Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics · 2022Review
- From the New Diagnostic Criteria to COVID-19 Pandemic Passing Through the Placebo Effect. What Have We Learned in the Management of Pediatric Migrane Over the Past 5 Years?Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
- Pediatric Episodic Migraine with Aura: A Unique Entity?Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Botulinum Toxin in the Treatment of Headache.Toxins · 2020Review
- Management of Chronic Migraine in Children and Adolescents: A Brief Discussion on Preventive Therapies.Paediatric drugs · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAs a post-approval commitment, this dose-ranging study was undertaken to evaluate efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA in adolescents.
backgroundIn adolescents, migraine is often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed and can present unique management challenges. OnabotulinumtoxinA was approved for prevention of chronic migraine (CM) in adults in 2010.
methodsThis multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized trial assessed a single treatment of onabotulinumtoxinA (155 U or 74 U) vs placebo (intramuscular saline) administered via the recommended fixed-dose fixed site paradigm in adolescents with CM aged 12 to <18 years. The primary efficacy measure was change in frequency of headache days from baseline at week 12; other measures included change in frequency of headache days at weeks 4 and 8 and change in frequency of severe headache days. Safety and tolerability were assessed.
resultsOf 125 randomized patients (onabotulinumtoxinA 155 U, n = 45; onabotulinumtoxinA 74 U, n = 43; placebo, n = 37), all were included in the primary efficacy analysis, and 115 (92.0%) completed the study. Lack of efficacy was the primary reason for discontinuing (n = 4; 3.2%); no patients discontinued because of adverse events. All treatments reduced frequency of headache days at week 12, with no significant differences between treatments. The mean (95% confidence interval) changes from baseline in the frequency of headache days during the 28-day period ending at week 12 (primary endpoint) were -6.3 (-8.5, -4.2), -6.4 (-8.8, -4.0), and -6.8 (-9.6, -4.1) days in the onabotulinumtoxinA 155 U, onabotulinumtoxinA 74 U, and placebo groups, respectively (P ≥ .474). All treatments reduced frequency of severe headache days and were well-tolerated; serious adverse events (n = 3) were considered unrelated to treatment and resolved without sequelae. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events were neck pain (n = 8), upper respiratory tract infection (n = 7), migraine, and nasopharyngitis (n = 5 each).
conclusionAlthough this study did not meet its efficacy endpoints, onabotulinumtoxinA was well tolerated in this adolescent population. Given previous data demonstrating the benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA in adults with CM, additional studies with design modifications, including adequate statistical power, to assess the efficacy of multiple treatment cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA for CM prevention in adolescents may be informative.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.